# Brahms 4 Symphonies on CD - Karajan? Klemperer? Or is the Abbado set worth the money?



## SAKO

All my Brahms' symphonies are on vinyl and not fantastic performances. I quite fancied buying a set of the 4 on CD, and checking Amazon I've narrowed it down to the sets by Karajan, Klemperer or Abbado.

The Karajan with the Berlin Phil on DG is the cheapest at less than a tenner, and I surmise is going to be a very good on all levels.

The Klemperer also gets fab reviews, is more costly at £17, but I'm skeptical of the recording quality of a 1950's performance.

Lastly is the Abbado set, which gets rave reviews, but how can it possibly be worth the £46 asking price? (I'm sure it must be cheaper somewhere).

I'm fairly new to Brahms, so haven't heard many variants. I'm sure a lot of you out there have at least one if not all of the above. Where would you put your money?


----------



## Carpenoctem

In this thread you can find some cool suggestions:

http://www.talkclassical.com/19707-favorite-brahms-symphony-3.html


----------



## NightHawk

From your list I would choose Klemperer or Abbado - though, you might want to consider the Bernstein/Vienna set - Bernstein and Vienna had great chemistry in performances of Sibelius, Mahler and other great symphonists. I have the Solti Brahms cycle with Chicago and a number of Brahms singles like C.Kleiber's 4th w Vienna, and Berstein's 1st and 2nd w Vienna. I prefer the Kleiber and Bernstein's that I have to anyone else I have heard. Sorry to muddy the water - lots of fine interpretations out there, though. Happy hunting!


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

My first choice is John Eliot Gardiner:










These are HIP (Historically Informed Performances) and have a great sense of "transparency" or a clarity in which one hears the interplay between instruments which offers a greater clarity to what often strikes me as the dense or overly lumpen aspects of Brahms' orchestral works. They are also very muscular... and as an added advantage you gain a good number of Brahms' marvelous shorter choral works.

My other choices include:










Or if you wish to go with the complete works by a single conductor I would go with Bohm:










or Karajan:


----------



## itywltmt

Go for Giulini:


----------



## DarkAngel

The Bruno Walter early 1950s set with NYPO is thrilling with good mono sound, it is nothing like the relaxed 1960s CSO set.....

 

Dorati is another set that blows the cobwebs off these warhorses.....



Also quite like the stereo Jochum set, but requires another purchase to obtain 4th, not sold as complete set

If you like slow relaxed Brahms these are not for you, all three have brisk lifted tempos and powerful dramatic performances


----------



## SAKO

Well, that gives me a few more to consider. 

I've taken a look at some of the suggestions. The Solti set looks good value for money through Marketplace. The Bernstein I see is live and I'm not a great lover of live recordings. The Gardiner HIP is certainly one to go on the list, and I fancied the Bohm yet the reviews don't seem to brilliant. Giulini is noted as using a slower temp, and I prefer a quicker.

Still lots of work to do.


----------



## DarkAngel

SLGO......
I want those Gardiner performances, but will patiently wait for the boxset to eventually appear


----------



## Vaneyes

HvK Brahms Symphonies, rec. 1964--his most powerful versions.

View attachment 7220
View attachment 7221
View attachment 7222


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

DarkAngel said:


> SLGO......
> I want those Gardiner performances, but will patiently wait for the boxset to eventually appear


Ah but then you'll miss out on the great packaging of these... not unlike Gardiner's series of Bach's cantatas.


----------



## brianwalker

I recommend the Jochum in mono, the live Kleiber 2nd and studio Kleiber 4th, and the 1st on the Karajan Legendary Recordings with the VPO.


----------



## DarkAngel

SLGO and others mentioned the Kleiber 4th, a must have I agree



Also somewhere down the line the mono Furtwangler set for Music & Arts label offers some rare insight
along with the mono Toscanini for RCA


----------



## powerbooks

DarkAngel said:


> SLGO and others mentioned the Kleiber 4th, a must have I agree
> 
> 
> 
> Also somewhere down the line the mono Furtwangler set for Music & Arts label offers some rare insight
> along with the mono Toscanini for RCA


Good choice. Speaking of mono, I would also like to add Jochum Berlin DG version, just before Karajan taking over the orchestra. Very very good mono sound from the 50s. The 2nd is one of the best version I personally like, especially the wild finale!


----------



## powerbooks

And RCA/BMG finally release the Levine Chicago version in NA. I got mine from Japan, but here is the bargain box from Amazon:









http://www.amazon.com/Brahms-Symphonies-Concerto-German-Requiem/dp/B004H6P2LU


----------



## powerbooks

For newer version, I also like Wand, or even Celibidache:

















And the 1 is on another set.


----------



## Jared

please, please try this set.


----------



## DarkAngel

Jared said:


> please, please try this set.


I do have that set will have to revisit soon to refresh my memory, just purchased this hybrid SACD set by Manze with small orchestra......awaiting delivery


----------



## campy

I second the recommendation of the Carlos Kleiber 4th above, and the Wand set is good too. But my favorite complete set is Maazel/Cleveland. (I also have Szell & Bernstein sets.)


----------



## Krisena

Anybody got an opinion on Solti's cycle? I bought it today.


----------



## Wandering

I have the Bohm DG reissued on inexpensive cd set. It includes not only Complete Symphonies but the Alto-Rhapsody, Tragic, Academic, and Haydn Variations. It has amazing sound for a.d.d. recordings, ranging from mid to late 70's. These recording are about as good as it gets. The exceptional sound quality is especially noticable in the lush vibrant finale of the 2nd.


----------



## billeames

Brahms to me is hard to for me to find a satisfactory recording. I have been collecting since 1981 and the following I own. Sets. Good: Solti, Kempe Munich, Jochum EMI and DG (Gramophone calls DG one a conductors Holiday, that it conducting as he pleases), Abbado DG Tower Japan (1970's recordings, available locally in Japan only), Klemperer EMI, Sanderling Dresden, Boult EMI, Beinum Concertgebouw, Levine CSO, Wand NDR. Overrated but may be acceptable to some: Abbado -lack of incisiveness 1990's, Karajan, although the sound is pleasing to the ear. I personally am not too cray about the Bohm VPO, Giulini (slow but powerful), Bernstein DG (sometimes I am in mood for 1 and 4). In poorer sound, my favorite is Furtwangler Music and Arts,...Toscanini remastered set on BMG. Mackerras Telarc good for what it is, small orchestra performance in good sound. Good for some:Szell. 
Alsop: I am still trying to figure out, though seems good at this point. I am not sure about Janowski (Pentatone Pittsburgh). 

Bill


----------



## AndorFoldes

Those are three excellent choices you have there.

Truth be told, you don't need to look any further. Everyone will have their own favourites, but there is no need to survey every record under the sun.

If you want something completely different, lighter and snappier, try Gardiner.

Otherwise, if you can find the Abbado at a decent price, go for it. These could be the best recordings Abbado made with the Berlin Philharmonic. Although the sound is a bit wet and light on brass and timpani.

The other two will not disappoint either.


----------



## Op.123

I'd go with Ashkenazy's recordings with the Cleveland Orchestra, perfect.


----------



## Declined

I just bought this set conducted by Haitink and performed by the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra: http://www.amazon.com/Johannes-Brah...=1401495740&sr=1-3&keywords=brahms+symphonies

It contains the 4 symphonies, the 2 piano concerti, the violin concerto, 10 hungarian dances, 2 serenades, the Academic Festival Overture, the Tragic Overture, and a few other stuff.

I'm very satisfied by it.


----------



## Dan Hornby

The original poster mentioned buying the Abbado set. That set is still over £40 but there has been a re-issue this year:









It's half the price, contains everything which was on the original set and has an extra CD which contains the Serenades. Worth buying!

Regarding other Brahms recordings, well I would recommend the Barenboim set with the CSO. It's relatively cheap, contains the Tragic and AF overtures and the Haydn variations. Was my first set so yes I do have some pull to it, but I haven't heard a better all-round set since buying it.


----------



## Dan Hornby

I'm sure this will be considered heresy to many, but I don't get the love for Carlos Kleiber's version of the 4th symphony. Totally overrated and out of all of the Brahms recordings I have, probably the most disappointing given its critical acclaim.


----------



## Dan Hornby

Clovis said:


> I have the Bohm DG reissued on inexpensive cd set. It includes not only Complete Symphonies but the Alto-Rhapsody, Tragic, Academic, and Haydn Variations. It has amazing sound for a.d.d. recordings, ranging from mid to late 70's. These recording are about as good as it gets. The exceptional sound quality is especially noticable in the lush vibrant finale of the 2nd.


I have too many Brahms recordings already to even consider getting it now. The Bohm is certainly on my list as I adore the Vienna Philharmonic (which is why I'm disappointed by the Kleiber 4th - the VPO aren't great in it in my opinion).

Persuading the wife that I need more shelves for more Brahms won't go down awfully well.

I also want the Solti set, the Celibidache, the Bernstein VPO, 2-4 from Gardiner (got 1 on its release), at least one of the Jochum sets and being a lover of Gergiev's Tchaikovsky, I want to see how he does with the LSO (I'd much prefer he recorded with the VPO or the BPO but that's another issue!).

Perhaps I'll just chuck out my CDs from the BBC Music Magazine, that will clear a significant amount of space (given I've not listened to most of them ).


----------



## SONNET CLV

When it comes to the Brahms symphonies, I find I have most often over the past half century turned to the William Steinberg/Pittsburgh Symphony set originally on black disc from Command Classics:









This set is currently available on a number of CD reissues, I believe.


----------



## david johnson

Jochum/BPO/DG/mono


----------



## realdealblues

SONNET CLV said:


> When it comes to the Brahms symphonies, I find I have most often over the past half century turned to the William Steinberg/Pittsburgh Symphony set originally on black disc from Command Classics:
> 
> View attachment 43555
> 
> 
> This set is currently available on a number of CD reissues, I believe.


Great set, unfortunately I have not seen available in the US in probably 10 years.


----------



## RonP

Just out of curiosity, has anyone here listened to the recordings Marin Alsop did? I'd be interested to hear how she compares to the legendary conductors listed in this thread.


----------



## BRHiler

I've got her Brahms 3, and it's ok at best. I've pretty much learned that I tend to only like her recordings of more modern music. Every CD I have of her with anything prior to the 20th century is a tame and safe recording. She doesn't offer anything new, or seem to have a personal opinion on it.

Her 20th century music CD's are top notch though, and I try to get most of them!


----------



## Mahlerian

BRHiler said:


> I've got her Brahms 3, and it's ok at best. I've pretty much learned that I tend to only like her recordings of more modern music. Every CD I have of her with anything prior to the 20th century is a tame and safe recording. She doesn't offer anything new, or seem to have a personal opinion on it.
> 
> Her 20th century music CD's are top notch though, and I try to get most of them!


I consider her disc of Takemitsu rather poor in contrast to the competition, and I haven't really heard anything from her that's impressed me very much. But then again, I don't listen to much neoromantic music, so maybe that's where she has her strengths.


----------



## BRHiler

Yeah, that's probably true Mahlerian. I do enjoy her Barber recordings, and if you consider Christopher Rouse neo-romantic (I do), she is also very good there too. Her Bernstein recordings, while not my favorites, are very good too. I haven't heard her Takemitsu, but I will avoid it now


----------



## Mahlerian

BRHiler said:


> Yeah, that's probably true Mahlerian. I do enjoy her Barber recordings, and if you consider Christopher Rouse neo-romantic (I do), she is also very good there too. Her Bernstein recordings, while not my favorites, are very good too. I haven't heard her Takemitsu, but I will avoid it now


I do enjoy Barber's music, so I'll probably want to check her recordings on Spotify, at least. Rouse doesn't do much for me, to be honest. I prefer Adams among recent Americans with Neoromantic tendencies.


----------



## BRHiler

I know we're taking this off topic, but before you cast down Rouse, have you heard his Flute Concerto or Rapture? If not, check those two pieces out. For Rapture, listen to the Helsinki Philharmonic Orchestra recording on Ondine. The Alan Gilbert recording is ok, but the Helsinki recording blows it away!

Back to Brahms....I just got the new Chailly recording and what I've heard (Sym #1 and 3) are excellent. I still love Karajan's set best though.


----------



## csacks

To me, as a set, Karajan is very good, but, to be honest, his version of the First is not that good. Instead of that, I do prefer Bernstein for that symphony (which is my favorite symphony by the way). Maybe it is because I am much more used to listen it, but I was very impressed with HvK recording of the second and the third, but disappointed with the first


----------



## BRHiler

I'll check out Bernstein's 1st. The Karajan is the one I know best, and when he lets the brass go at the "chorale" climax at the end of the 4th movement, that's goose bump time!


----------



## Saggy Shelves

BRHiler said:


> I'll check out Bernstein's 1st. The Karajan is the one I know best, and when he lets the brass go at the "chorale" climax at the end of the 4th movement, that's goose bump time!


 With respect to Karajan I read in Penguin Guide that he recorded the Brahm's 1st 5 times! I have the '64 and the '78 recordings with Berlin and, though I will be doing a critical listen to the '78 this evening, I will say of the '64 that the 4th Movement is a tour-de-force and the best of 6 versions I have listened to in the past two days- however the problem is that you may fall asleep before you get to it because, to my ears anyway, there is a strange lack of cohesion to the first two movements of this recording.

This is interesting because I highly enjoyed the Cleveland/Maazal recording of Brahm's 1st but for the 4th movement which seems to lose cohesion as if they had just run out of rehearsal time. (The 4th Mov. is 47 minutes long!) Therefore my current favorite Brahm's 1st in terms of performance + full sound is Cleveland/Maazal for 1st & 2nd Movs. - Karajan/Berlin('64) for 3rd & 4th Movs.!

Of other versions I have listened to on vinyl I find the Walter/Columbia exceptional as many reviewers have, but suspect a slight tendency towards bombast creeping in occasionally- perhaps this recording might sound more balanced on a CD re-issue than on vinyl?

With respect to other versions I have just compared back-to-back According to my notes the Abbado/Vienna Brahm's 1st 'doesn't breath'; the Leinsdorf/Boston is a little 'too studied'; and the Szell/Cleveland may be the best I have from end-to-end. [I made the hybrid recommendation above for the sake of awesome sound quality...]

Anybody on the various Karajan versions? How many are available? The Penguin Guide alludes to a late '60's recording they claim to prefer to the '64.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

I only have Szell's Cleveland Orchestra recording of the Brahms symphonies, but I've heard the Gardiner series of Brahms which are definitely superior in my opinion.


----------



## Albert7

I went with the Chailly version on Decca. I heard that it was fairly analytical and brooding.


----------



## Saggy Shelves

*Karajan recordings of Brahm's 1st Symphony*

With respect to the Karajan/Berlin 1978 recording I see right off the top that the 1978 1st Mov. is half a minute shorter than the 1964 which seemed dis-jointed to me... It does sound much more focused.


----------



## Saggy Shelves

With respect to length of the 4th Mov. of Brahm's Symphony #1- I need to correct my statement above that 'it is 47 minutes long'- this would be longer than most versions of the entire symphony. The 4th Mov. is more in the average vicinity of 18 minutes long- sorry for the mistake...


----------



## hpowders

The Klemperer set is one of the best.


----------



## omega

I'm very pleased with Abbado & BPO's superb recordings.


----------



## Itullian

Abbado is worth the money.
The sound is absolutely magnificent.
One of DGs best.


----------



## changeup

For whatever reason the Abbado set appears to have a very wide dynamic range...
Sometimes the volume is too low for me to comfortable listen.
But when I tune it up, in the climax it will incur complains from my neighbors (I live in an apartment)


----------



## Vaneyes

I'm a big fan of the 1963/4 BPO/HvK. Two others I like (with newer sound) are 1984 - '86 Staats. Berlin/Suitner (Berlin Classics), and 1996/7 BPO/Harnoncourt (Teldec).:tiphat:


----------



## BartokPizz

Has anybody heard Eschenbach's Brahms with the Houston Symphony? The cycle received mixed reviews (if I recall) on Amazon so I initially avoided it. But two years ago I acquired a twofer of 3 & 4 coupled with the Tragic Overture and Alto Rhapsody, and they now count among my very favorite Brahms discs. Riveting, great playing, superb sound. A dark horse in the Brahms sweepstakes.

http://www.amazon.com/Brahms-Sympho...1419295431&sr=1-13&keywords=eschenbach+brahms


----------



## Albert7

BartokPizz said:


> Has anybody heard Eschenbach's Brahms with the Houston Symphony? The cycle received mixed reviews (if I recall) on Amazon so I initially avoided it. But two years ago I acquired a twofer of 3 & 4 coupled with the Tragic Overture and Alto Rhapsody, and they now count among my very favorite Brahms discs. Riveting, great playing, superb sound. A dark horse in the Brahms sweepstakes.
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Brahms-Sympho...1419295431&sr=1-13&keywords=eschenbach+brahms


Cool to know. I haven't been a strong fan of Eschenbach particular with his tenure at the Philadelphia Orchestra.


----------



## nightscape

Eschenbach and mixed go together like needle and thread.


----------



## Bohemian

Vaneyes said:


> HvK Brahms Symphonies, rec. 1964--his most powerful versions.
> 
> View attachment 7220
> View attachment 7221
> View attachment 7222


Hi , I am a relative newbie to the classical genre . Mahler's 9th got me hooked . Looking to build my collection , any comparisons between HVK's 63-64 & 88-87 cycle ... Sound & Performance wise ? Thanks in advance .


----------



## SixFootScowl

Bohemian said:


> Hi , I am a relative newbie to the classical genre . Mahler's 9th got me hooked . Looking to build my collection , any comparisons between HVK's 63-64 & 88-87 cycle ... Sound & Performance wise ? Thanks in advance .


You want to check this thread, which opens with the question, "Which HvK Brahms cycle is best, please?"
http://www.talkclassical.com/37355-karajan-brahms-symphonies-cycle.html


----------



## hapiper

Well in my case I have two complete box sets. The previously mentioned one by James Levine with The Chicago Symphony and I also have the set by Sir George Solti with the same Orchestra. Both are very good and it is interesting hearing the same orchestra doing the same works by the same composers but with different conductors.


----------



## dsphipps100

I haven't heard the Levine set, but I can happily agree with hapiper that the Solti/Chicago set is excellent. There are many people who would say it's actually the finest work that Solti ever did in Chicago, and they might be right. Incidentally, in case anybody's interested, Solti takes the 1st-mvt exposition repeat in all three symphonies. (The 4th Sym has no such repeat.) The set also includes Tragic Overture and Academic Festival Overture.

Solti's usual fiery, hard-driven temperament is toned down with a much more relaxed, easy-going, expressive style, especially in regard to the (in?)famous Chicago brass section. Where his Mahler screams in anguish and his Bruckner thunders to the heavens, his Brahms, by way of contrast, simply exults triumphantly in the world around itself.

In particular, the Solti/Chicago finale of the 2nd Symphony, at 8:50, is one of the fastest-paced, most virtuosic 2nd Sym finales on record. Most of the other recordings I've heard are well over nine minutes, some even approaching ten minutes. (Even the Szell-Cleveland recording takes 9:24, surprisingly. I would have thought that Szell-Cleveland would leave everybody else in the dust for a dazzling display of super-fast technique, but I guess Solti/Chicago proved me wrong.)

The Chicago Symphony doesn't seem bothered in the least by the super-fast tempo, however. The whole orchestra simply digs in their heels and absolutely nails it, almost as if they're thoroughly enjoying proving they can play it faster than anybody else and yet still cleaner than anybody else at the same time. Absolutely amazing. (And kudos to the Chicago 2nd Clarinet at the 1:10 mark for nailing that super-difficult arpeggio that most 2nd clarinet players wimp out on!)

The Solti/Chicago set is characterized by weighty, muscular playing with a relatively clean, clear-sounding transparency. Brahms' penchant for juxtaposing contrasting rhythmic patterns is relished by the CSO as they gleefully show the world precisely how those rhythms fit together and over-lay on top of each other, where most other orchestras simply muddy the proceedings at those places so you can't really tell exactly what's going on.

The only (possible) down-side to this transparency is that the resultant sound-stage might be a little on the narrow side, depending on how you like your Brahms. (Although the Chicago sound is miles wide compared to the unfortunately constricted sounding, but otherwise excellent Szell-Cleveland set, for example.)

By contrast, if you prefer your Brahms to sound like a tsunami of sound coming out of your speakers, then you definitely want the Berliner Philharmoniker. Nobody else can match them for the tsunami-of-sound approach to Brahms. (Whether or not this is a good thing is entirely up to each individual listener. For me, it just depends on what kind of mood I'm in.) Out of all the Berlin Brahms sets that I've heard, Karajan's last set (with the DDD spars code) has the best recorded sound, although Abbado's set, to my ears, outdoes every set Karajan ever recorded with them. Abbado's shaping of melodic lines and his handling of the overall formal structures seems to have more thought given to them than with Karajan, who seems to focus mostly on the sound of his orchestra.

So with the Abbado-Berlin set, coming just on the heels of Karajan's tenure with them, you still get the Karajan sound alive and well, but with Abbado's operatic sense of lyricism, formal structure, and pacing. Abbado's set also includes Tragic Overture, Academic Festival Overture, the Haydn Variations, the Alto Rhapsody, the Song of Destiny, "Nanie", and the Song of the Fates.

My only two complaints about the Abbado set are that (1) he takes the repeats in Syms 2 & 3, but not in #1. Why not do that one as well and maintain consistency?????







If there's session time to take the much longer repeat in # 2, then surely there can be time found for the repeat in # 1. So I simply opened up my FLAC file of that movement in Adobe Audition, and with a little editing/cross-fading/counter-balancing, Abbado now takes the repeat whether he wanted to or not.









(2) There's a spot in the 1st Sym's last movement (at the 9:20 mark) where one of his clarinet players (it sounds like it might be the principal, Karl Leister himself!) sounds as if his mouth around the mouthpiece is getting tired, because he almost loses control of the sound, which can be a dangerous thing with a clarinet. (Ever heard a school band full of clarinet beginners??????







) (Sometimes, if I just really don't feel like listening to the clarinet player almost losing it, I might substitute in Karajan's 4th movement, which is really quite excellent on its own in all truth.)

In all fairness, however, to the Berlin clarinets, they are normally my favorite clarinet section in the whole world (I'm not exaggerating), and their 2nd clarinet player absolutely nails the spot in the 2nd Sym's finale just as well as the Chicago clarinet did, although Abbado is going considerably slower than Solti did, taking 9:42 compared to Solti's 8:50.

(The reason I'm making such a big deal about the clarinet is because I used to be a professional clarinet player, so I naturally tend to notice the clarinets on any recording.)

Otherwise, the Abbado set is really quite excellent. Syms 2, 3, & 4, are well-nigh to perfection to my ears, if you like the Berlin tsunami-of-sound approach, that is, like I mentioned earlier.

So you can have the muscular but clean-sounding Solti/Chicago set, or the riper, thicker-sounding, but mostly excellent Abbado/Berlin set.

Those would be my two primary recommendations for Brahms.

And in case anybody's interested, I also have the Haitink-Boston, Szell-Cleveland, Giulini-Los Angeles (1 & 2), Barenboim-Chicago, Bernstein-Vienna, Muti-Philadelphia, Rattle-Berlin, all three Karajan-Berlin sets, and the Kleiber-Vienna 4th. Solti and Abbado are better than all the others to my ears.

Happy listening.


----------



## jflatter

My favourite sets are in this order : 1. Karl Böhm's which is well paced and where he get's a wonderful sound from the VPO. 2.Kurt Sanderling with Dresden which is wonderfully full and rich without sounding flabby. I'm surprised that there is only small mention of this set in this thread. 3. Otto Klemperer with the Philharmonia very well measured performances which are full of character.

I agree with a previous poster and I also don't admire Kleiber's Brahms 4 recording in the way some people do. I've always wondered whether it was poorly recorded.

The modern set I like is Thielemann's with Dresden which I know got mixed reviews but I thought it was a very good set, particularly Symphony No 4.

Wilhelm Furtwängler's recordings are also worth checking out but are of course not always in the best sound.


----------



## dsphipps100

I just wanted to mention that today, the Levine/Chicago set arrived in my mail. I ordered it after seeing some comments on this forum (I think) and also on a couple of review sites that prefer the Levine over the Solti, which has been a favorite of mine ever since it first came out on vinyl LPs. (Although Abbado/Berlin is my ultimate favorite.) I'm sorry to say that I'm very disappointed with the Levine set, even though the price was only about $10 from Amazon (plus shipping).

As I'm listening to it right now, while I'm typing this, the sound picture is very narrow, almost like a mono recording (and I'm listening to it on a Surround Sound system!). According to the packaging, all the recordings were made either in Chicago's Orchestra Hall or at the Medinah Temple. These are the two locations used most often also by Solti, and Decca certainly had no trouble getting (mostly) excellent sound for Solti, so I don't see why RCA should be getting such constricted sounding results from the same venues. That could easily be corrected with a little digital editing, however, but then there's Levine and the Chicago Symphony.

The Chicago Symphony's performance, while certainly quite good, is definitely not up to the standard they set on their later set with Solti. There are little "blips" here and here, like a sloppy attack from a flute player, a violin player who clearly didn't have their left hand quite set on the fingerboard before they started drawing their bow, phrases that Brahms scored as being passed/handed around the orchestra from section to section that are dropped, over and over again before the next section picks it up. This last item is more Levine's responsibility than the orchestra's, but regardless, the CSO has been doing Brahms long enough that they shouldn't need Levine to hold their hand in order to know how to connect phrases from one instrument section to another. This is giving the performance an oddly disjointed, perfunctory feel.

In addition, there is very little expression or inflection being played into the melodic phrases. (In layman's terms, they're just playing the notes without putting any "feeling" into it.) Tempos are very much on the fast side also, giving it a feeling as if it's a run-through dress rehearsal that just happened to get recorded. Even the somewhat sterile Szell-Cleveland recording has far more expression/inflection that what I'm hearing here.

In the 2nd Symphony's famous, fast-paced finale, I'm hearing all kinds of little errors - tuning problems, sloppy attacks, poor balance, and the same, constant non-expressiveness that seems to pervade everything else I'm hearing from this set. With the distant, constricted-sound engineering (probably from the mikes being placed too far back), the tympani are swamping the whole orchestra, even Chicago's (in?)famous brass section.

With all due respect for any Levine-Chicago Brahms advocates around here, I'm sorry, but Solti and Abbado are still firmly at the top of my list. Even the Barenboim-Chicago set is better than this one.

(What's doubly disappointing about this is that Levine/Chicago recorded an excellent Orff Carmina Burana for DG and also an excellent Mahler 3rd for RCA, so they've proven they've got the goods. What happened here??????)


----------



## starthrower

For anybody on a tight budget, the Decca Ultimate series Brahms edition is a steal for 10 dollars. A five disc set including symphonies 1-4 by Sawallisch/Vienna, piano concertos by Arrau/Haitink, violin and triple concertos, Hadyn Variations, and Festival Overture all by Concertgebouw. https://www.amazon.com/Ultimate-Bra...id=1469935298&sr=1-1&keywords=ultimate+brahms


----------



## Pugg

starthrower said:


> For anybody on a tight budget, the Decca Ultimate series Brahms edition is a steal for 10 dollars. A five disc set including symphonies 1-4 by Sawallisch/Vienna, piano concertos by Arrau/Haitink, violin and triple concertos, Hadyn Variations, and Festival Overture all by Concertgebouw. https://www.amazon.com/Ultimate-Bra...id=1469935298&sr=1-1&keywords=ultimate+brahms


If one searches right , lots of good bargains .


----------



## starthrower

Pugg said:


> If one searches right , lots of good bargains .


As my Vietnamese friend used to say, I'm a boggin shoppa!


----------



## Pugg

starthrower said:


> As my Vietnamese friend used to say, I'm a boggin shoppa!


I will try to remember that .


----------



## Merl

Sorry for coming to this discussion late. I'm not a huge Brahms fan but I have 5 sets of his symphonies (go figure) - Karajan (70s), Szell, Abbado, Zinman and Chailly. Of all of them I much prefer Chailly and Abbado's cycles and if I was pushed for an outright first choice it would be Chailly's. Very fresh sounding and beautifully recorded. I have a big soft spot for Karajan's 3rd though (it was my first Brahms disc).


----------



## Pugg

Merl said:


> Sorry for coming to this discussion late. I'm not a huge Brahms fan but I have 5 sets of his symphonies (go figure) - Karajan (70s), Szell, Abbado, Zinman and Chailly. Of all of them I much prefer Chailly and Abbado's cycles and if I was pushed for an outright first choice it would be Chailly's. Very fresh sounding and beautifully recorded. I have a big soft spot for Karajan's 3rd though (it was my first Brahms disc).


Don't be sorry, always nice to see a older thread being uses again.


----------



## Merl

Actually I have 6 sets. Forgot about Mackerras. It's not a very bombastic set but it is beautifully played. Lacks a lot of wallop tho.:angel:


----------



## Dr Johnson

For me it is Klemperer first, second and last.


----------



## Pugg

Bernstein still for me and Karajan, DG first recording


----------



## jegreenwood

I got the Abbado in the mega-box set released by DG a couple of years ago. I bought the big box as it was not that much more than his Brahms cycle purchased new on its own. I like it a lot. Other favorites include Klemperer and Szell. I have a Japanese release of the Szell, which I believe has been remastered.

I bought the Chailly on Blu-Ray a while back, partly because of the reviews, partly because it was a bargain and partly as I did not own a hi-rez cycle. You can see my review posted on Amazon. I am among a number of customers who reported defective discs. I'm not sure if that has been corrected, so _caveat emptor_. Since then I have listened to it on Tidal and do not feel I need to add it to my collection.


----------



## regnaDkciN

SONNET CLV said:


> When it comes to the Brahms symphonies, I find I have most often over the past half century turned to the William Steinberg/Pittsburgh Symphony set originally on black disc from Command Classics:
> 
> View attachment 43555
> 
> 
> This set is currently available on a number of CD reissues, I believe.





realdealblues said:


> Great set, unfortunately I have not seen available in the US in probably 10 years.


It's currently available in high-res download form from HDTT.

https://www.highdeftapetransfers.com/search?q=steinberg+brahms


----------



## Merl

Lol, 2 years ago I only had 6 sets on disc (obviously I didnt mention the 20 on my HD at the time). Funnily enough I still only have about 15 sets on CD but way more than 20 on HD (probably triple that number) . As I said, elsewhere, I didn't get some Brahms symphonies at first but perseverance paid off. Makes me laugh when I read my older posts on here.


----------



## CnC Bartok

I am not a huge fan of either the Abbado or the Chailly sets. Both are beautifully played, but compared with my favourite cycles or individual recordings there's something extra-special not there.

My favourite sets are:
Barbirolli
James Loughran, whose Halle set on Classics for Pleasure are imperfectly gorgeous.
Klemperer (a justifiably obvious choice!)
And number One:
Eugen Jochum's later London PO cycle. No.3 is a highlight, but all four are glorious, just glorious!


----------



## DarkAngel

Robert Pickett said:


> I am not a huge fan of either the Abbado or the Chailly sets. Both are beautifully played, but compared with my favourite cycles or individual recordings there's something extra-special not there.
> 
> My favourite sets are:
> Barbirolli
> James Loughran, whose Halle set on Classics for Pleasure are imperfectly gorgeous.
> Klemperer (a justifiably obvious choice!)
> And number One:
> *Eugen Jochum's later London PO cycle. No.3 is a highlight, but all four are glorious, just glorious!*


Jochum LPO is one of the very best......
Requires purchase of two double sets to get all 4 symphonies, or the large Jochum Icon boxset


----------



## Resurrexit

I'll take Walter and Toscanini. Klemperer and Solti are very fine as well.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

I have experienced the greatest performance satisfaction from the following sets: Klemperer/Philharmonia Orchestra, Walter/New York Philharmonic (mono), Walter/Columbia Symphony, Kertesz/Vienna Philharmonic, Jochum/Berlin Philharmonic (mono) and Van Beinum/Amsterdam (Royal) Concertgebouw. VB's First and Fourth are stereo, his Second and Third are mono.


----------



## SixFootScowl

My first go at Brahms' symphonies was this one:









I have never been fond of Karajan in any music, and this one did not really move me either.

Then I found this at a used sale and grabbed if for a try and like it more than the Karajan set:









However, that set is not all that highly rated (on Amazon anyway) so maybe I need something better.


----------



## CnC Bartok

If you prefer Rahbari, then keep on doing so! Trust your own ears!!

That said, you could pick up the Eugen Jochum Icon box! Contains his Brahms, his peerless final Beethoven cycle, and his peerless later Bruckner cycle, with a bit of Bach and Mozart chucked in for good measure. Seriously, a box to cherish!


----------



## Becca

Fritz Kobus said:


> However, that set is not all that highly rated (on Amazon anyway) so maybe I need something better.


My very strong advise is to pay very little attention to Amazon ratings. For a start you know essentially nothing about the reviewers, their level of knowledge etc. Yes there are useful gems to be picked out but a lot of what you read is uninformed, worthless and sometimes startlingly obtuse (but then so is David Hurwitz, but that is another topic!) If you want to use reviews as a guide, then pick some reviewers who you have read frequently and where you know their biases and how they may agree or disagree with your own. It could be someone you always disagree with, but even that is useful because if they love something, you probably will not!


----------



## Merl

Robert Pickett said:


> I am not a huge fan of either the Abbado or the Chailly sets. Both are beautifully played, but compared with my favourite cycles or individual recordings there's something extra-special not there.
> 
> My favourite sets are:
> Barbirolli
> James Loughran, whose Halle set on Classics for Pleasure are imperfectly gorgeous.
> Klemperer (a justifiably obvious choice!)
> And number One:
> Eugen Jochum's later London PO cycle. No.3 is a highlight, but all four are glorious, just glorious!


I love Loughran's set. The others are great picks too. Tbf, Chailly is well down my list theses days as there are so many better cycles (Sanderling, Levine, Jochum, Skrowaczewski, Szell, etc). I still rate Abbado's set highly (I'm certainly no Abbado fan) but rarely play it. Levine gets the most plays (CSO set). Utterly superb cycle.


----------



## wkasimer

Becca said:


> My very strong advise is to pay very little attention to Amazon ratings.


I agree - the number of stars is meaningless - some people leave a one-star review if they receive a defective CD, or have an issue with a third party vendor, or clearly had no idea what they were buying. And five-star reviews that contain less than three sentences are usually also worthless. Not to mention the fact that Amazon frequently links reviews to the wrong recordings.

When I read the reviews on Amazon, I usually go right to the three- and four-star reviews, as they are most likely to be imbued with some specificity about the recording in question. And when I write a review, I try to make clear what recording I'm actually reviewing, in case Amazon screws it up.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Fritz Kobus said:


> However, that set is not all that highly rated (on Amazon anyway) so maybe I need something better.


I realize the problems with Amazon ratings which is why I said "on Amazon anyway." The "anyway" was supposed to mean that it is not much of a reference for ratings. There are reviewers on Amazon whom I appreciate and look for their reviews, yet I don't always go with them. But when there are a lot of reviews and it is only getting 2 - 3 stars, it usually is a poor recording. So a lot has to do with the number of reviews.

Statistically as the number of reviews goes up you are more likely to get a true value for the overall rating, albeit outliers for inept or angry people who trash a perfectly good recording in the reviews because they had problems with the seller. Sometimes I will recalculate without their review.

Or course the other problem is sometimes Amazon gets the wrong reviews in a listing, so you have to kind of look to see what people are talking about. Some who are aware of this will cite in their review title what they are reviewing, presumably in case Amazon mis-locates it.


----------



## Josquin13

Two simultaneous threads on the same subject? Okay, I'll post my thoughts here too...

My three favorite Brahms symphony sets are as follows:

1. Eugen Jochum, London Philharmonic EMI. His earlier DG mono set, with the Berlin Philharmonic, is very fine too (& comes in excellent mono sound). However, I prefer the EMI set for its stereo sound. It's available on two EMI double forte 'two for one' bargain sets (containing 2 CDs each--the second being unfortunately coupled with a less than ideal German Requiem conducted by Klaus Tennstedt), and in the excellent Jochum Icon box set too (which is a treasure trove, & worth every penny!). The cycle has also been recently reissued by Warner, on individual import CDs. Jochum was a masterful Brahms conductor--much in the same vein as Fürtwangler (who was his idol), but not as wildly "expressionistic": Jochum approaches Brahms with a bit more classical restraint than Fürtwangler, yet he offers the same abundance of musical insights. Among German conductors, I'd recommend Jochum and Fürtwangler in Brahms over Karajan and Böhm.

2. Istvan Kertesz, Vienna Philharmonic, Decca. This was Kertesz's last major recording project before his untimely death. It's a very special Brahms cycle, as the 1960s Vienna Philharmonic plays exceptionally well for Kertesz. The set is available on two Decca bargain CD issues, and more recently has been reissued in a box set by Australian Eloquence.

3. Kurt Sanderling, Staatskapelle Dresden, Eurodisc. Another fantastic set, with one of the great orchestras in the world at the time. Historically, the Staatskapelle had been Carl Maria von Weber, Richard Wagner, Fritz Reiner, Fritz Busch, and Richard Strauss's orchestra, which was passed down to Rudolf Kempe after WW2. In 1971, when Sanderling made these recordings, the high standards of those earlier musical times were still arguably intact (to a good degree). Sanderling's tenure in Dresden came between 1964-1967, so in 1971 he and the orchestra had already worked together for several years. As for the sound quality, it's good, but the set could probably use a remastering, since the Eurodisc CDs were released in 1994.

With that said, all three sets are currently available on (pricey) remastered hybrid SACD reissues from Japan, which nostalgically sport the original LP jacket covers. However, they're limited editions, so devoted fans looking to update the sound quality probably shouldn't wait too long.

https://www.amazon.com/Brahms-4-Sym...r=1-3-fkmr1&keywords=jochum+brahms+sacd+tower
https://www.amazon.com/Brahms-Four-...r=1-1-fkmr1&keywords=jochum+brahms+sacd+tower
https://www.amazon.com/Brahms-Vier-...r=1-4-fkmr1&keywords=jochum+brahms+sacd+tower

I've yet to hear all of Otto Klemperer's set, so I shouldn't comment on it, but I'd prefer the above 3 sets, performance-wise, to both Karajan & Abbado's Brahms cycles (although the latter's cycle has first rate sound quality). Abbado didn't modify or change the sound of Karajan's Berlin orchestra much (unlike Rattle), so the orchestral sound on his DG cycle is essentially the same as Karajan's--a thickened, velvety string laden sound--even if Abbado's conducting is more nimble & lithe than Karajan's. Personally, I don't think that's quite the right sound for Brahms, who once complained to Pierre Monteux that German conductors performed his music too heavily, and that he preferred French conductors in his music. Judging from this comment, it seems that Brahms was more of a (Gallic) 'classicist' than is generally realized or acknowledged. Therefore, I don't expect he'd have been altogether happy with the heavier, less nimble & transparent, thickened orchestral sound of Karajan's Berlin Philharmonic in his music. For example, it doesn't work in a more classically inspired piece like Brahms' Haydn Variations, which requires a more nimble, transparent approach (such as with Kurt Masur & the woodwinds of the Leipzig Gewandhaus Orchestra, who get the finale better than anyone I've heard: https://www.amazon.com/Brahms-Sym-N...words=masur+haydn+variations+eloquence+brahms ). I'd rule out Karl Böhm's Brahms for similar reasons.

Other fine Brahms conductors include Bernard Haitink (Concertgebouw Orchestra of Amsterdam), Pierre Monteux (especially when heard live in Brahms--his favorite composer, as Monteux said he disliked all his Decca studio recordings, claiming they'd lost spontaneity in the studio with all the required retakes: 



), Kurt Masur (at times--though he's hit and miss in Brahms), and Carlos Kleiber with the Vienna Philharmonic in the 4th symphony (speaking of a successfully lean, classical approach to Brahms: 



).


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Josquin13 said:


> My three favorite Brahms symphony sets are as follows:
> 
> 1. Eugen Jochum, London Philharmonic EMI. His earlier DG mono set, with the Berlin Philharmonic, is very fine too (& comes in excellent mono sound).
> 2. Istvan Kertesz, Vienna Philharmonic, Decca.
> 3. Kurt Sanderling, Staatskapelle Dresden, Eurodisc.


Agreed on the Jochum/London Philharmonic set as well. I slightly prefer Jochum's mono collection because of what I feel are the more polished and sweeter sounds produced by the Berlin Philharmonic.


----------



## flamencosketches

Bump for Brahms...

I still love the Klemperer/Philharmonia cycle the best. That being said, I just ordered the Jochum/LPO 1-3 for about 5 bucks after being really impressed with his recording of the 3rd, immensely preferring it to the Karajan/Berlin '60s I listened to immediately prior. But why is the 2CD with the 4th (and Tennstedt's Deutsches Requiem) so much harder to find/more expensive? Hopefully I'll complete the set in time...

I haven't heard all four, but I really like Marin Alsop's Brahms 1 & 2 with the same orchestra (London Philharmonic). I stand by that Klemperer is the one to beat but I'm afraid I'm a little burnt out on his "granitic" sound at the moment, and am searching for a Brahms cycle that is more dynamic and flexible—I think I may have found it in Jochum, we'll see when it arrives.


----------



## Merl

flamencosketches said:


> I haven't heard all four, but I really like Marin Alsop's Brahms 1 & 2 with the same orchestra (London Philharmonic).......


Good call with the Alsop, FMCS, but you're missing a treat not completing the set. The 3rd is amongst the finest 3rd on disc, IMO (Jim P on here will agree) and there's a very good 4th. That 3rd is terrific, though.


----------



## flamencosketches

Merl said:


> Good call with the Alsop, FMCS, but you're missing a treat not completing the set. The 3rd is amongst the finest 3rd on disc, IMO (Jim P on here will agree) and there's a very good 4th. That 3rd is terrific, though.


I'm looking out for good deals on the last two volumes, so hopefully it will be complete before too long. The 3rd is really not an easy symphony to pull off.


----------



## Merl

flamencosketches said:


> I'm looking out for good deals on the last two volumes, so hopefully it will be complete before too long. The 3rd is really not an easy symphony to pull off.


Shame you're not in the UK, FMCS. You can buy both discs in mint condition secondhand on Ebay for around £3 each (with postage included).


----------



## ORigel

I like the Karajan, but I like the Abbado better. I haven't listened to the Klemperer yet.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

I'm a Brahms cycle fiend, and I have yet to find anyone with a greater understanding of the music than Jochum. Some of the greatest music-making and conducting I have ever heard. Both the mono BPO and stereo LSO sets are absolutely superb. If you want a little weightier sound, go with the BPO which is in _very_ good mono, but overall the LSO is probably your best bet. My other "desert island sets" (besides Furtwangler's electric interpretations) would be Klemperer, Abbado, Sanderling/Dresden, Walter/Columbia, and probably Kempe (I've only heard his 3rd, which blew me away, but haven't been able to find the rest on streaming). One real dark horse I want to mention is Zinman. Unusually quick tempi, but I like it; it's a nice, swiftly integrated view of these symphonies.


----------



## Merl

Allegro Con Brio said:


> I'm a Brahms cycle fiend, and I have yet to find anyone with a greater understanding of the music than Jochum. Some of the greatest music-making and conducting I have ever heard. Both the mono BPO and stereo LSO sets are absolutely superb. If you want a little weightier sound, go with the BPO which is in _very_ good mono, but overall the LSO is probably your best bet. My other "desert island sets" (besides Furtwangler's electric interpretations) would be Klemperer, Abbado, Sanderling/Dresden, Walter/Columbia, and probably Kempe (I've only heard his 3rd, which blew me away, but haven't been able to find the rest on streaming). One real dark horse I want to mention is Zinman. Unusually quick tempi, but I like it; it's a nice, swiftly integrated view of these symphonies.


I have both Jochums too but the stereo sound of the 2nd set is the clincher. They are both superb though. I should have mentioned the Zinman as I think it's fantastic too, ACB. If you like the Zinman try the Zehetmar. That's really peppy too but with plenty of clout (and a killer 4th). I should have flagged Nelsons' terrific Brahms cycle too. So many great Brahms sets. Not enough time to play them all.


----------



## Knorf

I'm giving the Chailly/Gewandhaus another listen. It's a Brahms cycle that I rate extremely highly! That and the Skrowaczewski are my favorites among recent sets, and both are competitive with any other favorites, modern or ancient. (I haven't heard the Nelsons/Boston cycle, yet. It's on the list. ETA: and for some reason I've missed out on Jochum, for no reason other than limited hours in the day. I'm sure I'd like it.)

As a sidenote, I think I rate Bernstein's Brahms cycle with Vienna higher than many. If you go in expecting Bernstein, and accept that for what it is, there's a lot to love about that cycle. 

I've listed them elsewhere recently, but Wand, Walter, Abbado, Klemperer, Szell, Karajan, Dorati, Berglund, Kertesz, they all do lot for me. More Brahms than you can shake a stick at!


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Jochum EMI, Abbado, and the underrated Kempe are for me the most consistent cycles. And of course the Furtwängler Music & Arts set if you can handle the older sound. Other great historic sets include Weingartner, Toscanini (M&A or Testament), and Walter’s 1950 mono set, now available on Sony.

Klemperer has an excellent 1st and 2nd but to me is not inspired or flexible enough in the 3rd and 4th.

Van Beinum, Walter (Sony stereo) and Kertesz are also very good. Hard to know what to recommend with Karajan since my loyalties are split between his three sets. I may even be inclined to rate the digital cycle the best if you really want a complete Karajan set. Now that I think about, my favorite 1st is from the 60s cycle, 2nd from the digital cycle, 3rd is the early Decca VPO, and 4th from the 70s cycle. So yeah pretty much all over the map. 

I once owned Sanderling but sold it back due to being a bit bland.


----------



## Knorf

I think I agree that if you want a Karajan cycle, it's the digital cycle, or a Frankenstein cycle. LIke Brahmsianhorn, my favorite among Karajan Brahms 3s is Vienna.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Agreed about Bernstein with one exception: I find the 3rd so distorted as to be intolerable. No flow. But the 1st and 2nd are among the best I know. The 4th is almost great except again for me the gear shifts in the final movement are too odd so as to be distracting.


----------



## Merl

Brahmsianhorn said:


> ..
> 
> Hard to know what to recommend with Karajan since my loyalties are split between his three sets. I may even be inclined to rate the digital cycle the best if you really want a complete Karajan set.....


I probably agree with you there, BHS. It's definitely his most consistent set. Also with you on Kempe - it's a criminally underrated set.


----------



## Knorf

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Agreed about Bernstein with one exception: I find the 3rd so distorted as to be intolerable. No flow.


Yes, I agree. The Third from the Bernstein Vienna Brahms set is the weakest, and one I have a hard time defending. So I mostly don't, and won't here. The others are all very good, though.



Merl said:


> Also with you on Kempe - it's a criminally underrated set.


Alright, alright. Dammit. I'll add it to the list. Like I need more Brahms...


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

These are my "essentials" for all four symphonies.

◄ = top recommendation in good sound
♫ = top overall performance

(Note the "reflexive" Furtwängler ratings )

*Symphony No. 1*

Wilhelm Furtwängler (1951) (Tahra, Music & Arts) ♫
Willem Mengelberg (1940) (Philips)
Felix Weingartner (EMI)
Arturo Toscanini (1941) (RCA)
Herbert von Karajan (1964) (DG) ◄
Leonard Bernstein (DG)
Jascha Horenstein (Chesky)
Otto Klemperer (EMI)
Bruno Walter (1959) (Sony)
Karl Böhm (1960) (DG, Belart)

Further listening: Wilhelm Furtwängler (1952) (Tahra, DG), Wilhelm Furtwängler (EMI), Bruno Walter (1937) (Preiser, Opus Kura, Avid, Grammofono), Arturo Toscanini (1943) (Music & Arts), Arturo Toscanini (1951) (RCA, Andante), Karl Böhm (Orfeo), Claudio Abbado (1990) (DG), Herbert von Karajan (1987) (DG), Bruno Walter (1953) (Sony, IDI), Leopold Stokowski (1972) (Cala), Rafael Kubelik (1952) (Naxos), Eugen Jochum (DG), Eugen Jochum (EMI), Rudolf Kempe (Testament), Arturo Toscanini (1952) (Testament, Pristine), Hermann Abendroth (Biddulph), Eduard van Beinum (1958) (Philips), Leonard Bernstein (Sony), Guido Cantelli (Testament), Sir Adrian Boult (EMI)

*Symphony No. 2*

Wilhelm Furtwängler (1945) (DG, Music & Arts, Archipel, Andante) ♫
Pierre Monteux (1945) (RCA)
Felix Weingartner (EMI)
Otto Klemperer (EMI) ◄
Herbert von Karajan (1986) (DG)
Leonard Bernstein (DG)
Bruno Walter (Sony)

Further listening: Wilhelm Furtwängler (EMI), Bruno Walter (1953) (Sony, EMI Great Conductors, IDI), Bruno Walter (1950) (Tahra, AS, Music & Arts, Urania, Arkadia), Willem Mengelberg (Teldec, Naxos), Sir Thomas Beecham (EMI), Leopold Stokowski (Phild.) (Archipel), Rafael Kubelik (1957) (Decca), Eduard van Beinum (1958) (Philips), Karl Böhm (1956) (DG), Herbert von Karajan (1955) (EMI), Eugen Jochum (EMI), Eugen Jochum (DG), Fritz Busch (Dutton, EMI), Walter Damrosch (Biddulph), Rudolf Kempe (Testament), Leonard Bernstein (Sony), Arturo Toscanini (BBC), Arturo Toscanini (1952) (Testament, Pristine), Claudio Abbado (1988) (DG), William Steinberg (Millennium), Leopold Stokowski (Cala), Sir John Barbirolli (Royal Classics), Pierre Monteux (1959) (Decca)

*Symphony No. 3*

Wilhelm Furtwängler (1954) (DG, Music & Arts) ♫
Felix Weingartner (EMI)
Claudio Abbado (1989) (DG) ◄
Karl Böhm (1953) (Decca)
Guido Cantelli (EMI, Testament)
Rudolf Kempe (Testament, Warner)
Eduard van Beinum (1956) (Philips)
Eugen Jochum (EMI)

Further listening: Wilhelm Furtwängler (1949) (EMI), Sir John Barbirolli (1967) (Royal), Clemens Krauss (Preiser, Biddulph), Bruno Walter (1936) (Koch, Andante), Fritz Reiner (RCA), Bruno Walter (Sony), Leonard Bernstein (Sony), Istvan Kertesz (Decca), Otto Klemperer (EMI), Jascha Horenstein (Vox), Herbert von Karajan (Decca), Arturo Toscanini (1952) (Testament, Pristine), George Szell (Decca), Eugen Jochum (DG), Sergei Koussevitzky (Pearl), Leopold Stokowski (1928) (Biddulph), Herbert von Karajan (1978) (DG), Marin Alsop (Naxos), George Szell (Sony), Istvan Kertesz (Decca)

*Symphony No. 4*

Wilhelm Furtwängler (1949) (Tahra, Preiser, Seven Seas) ♫
Felix Weingartner (EMI, Living Era, Andante)
Arturo Toscanini (1935) (EMI, Arkadia)
Otto Klemperer (1954) (Testament)
Carlos Kleiber (DG) ◄
Claudio Abbado (DG)
Fritz Reiner (Chesky)
Eduard van Beinum (Philips)

Further listening: Wilhelm Furtwängler (1943) (Music & Arts), Wilhelm Furtwängler (1948) (EMI), Arturo Toscanini (1952) (Testament, Pristine), Victor de Sabata (DG, Andante), Leopold Stokowski (Phild.) (Archipel), Rudolf Kempe (Testament), Herbert von Karajan (1978) (DG), Willem Mengelberg (Teldec, Naxos), Leonard Bernstein (DG), Leopold Stokowski (IMP), Karl Böhm (1938) (Iron Needle), Eugen Jochum (EMI), Eugen Jochum (DG), Bruno Walter (Music & Arts), Hermann Abendroth (Biddulph), Karl Böhm (DG), Arturo Toscanini (RCA), Carlo Maria Giulini (DG), Bruno Walter (Sony)


----------



## gvn

Brahmsianhorn said:


> *Symphony No. 1*
> 
> … Leopold Stokowski (1972) (Cala) ...
> 
> *Symphony No. 2*
> 
> … Leopold Stokowski (Phild.) (Archipel) … Leopold Stokowski (Cala) …
> 
> *Symphony No. 3*
> 
> … Leopold Stokowski (1928) (Biddulph) ...
> 
> *Symphony No. 4*
> 
> … Leopold Stokowski (Phild.) (Archipel)…


These particular choices intrigue me. I've bought Stokowski's final studio recordings of all four Brahms symphonies,* but recently I've been wondering whether I should collect his 1920s-1930s Philadelphia series too. How much did his overall interpretative approach to Brahms change over the decades, and in what ways?

(Of course I realize that there would also be differences [a] in the recorded sound and * in the distinctive sonority of the orchestra. I'm asking only about changes in Stokowski's own approach to conducting Brahms.)

*His final studio Brahms recordings were made with: 1, London SO (Decca); 2, National PO (CBS); 3, Houston SO (Everest); 4, New PO (RCA). How characteristic of him to record them with four different ensembles and for four different companies!*


----------



## Gray Bean

Any Brahms by Furtwangler is worth hearing. I also love the Walter/Columbia SO cycle and the Bernstein/Vienna Phil cycle...and countless others: Jochum, Karajan, Wand, Klemperer, Abbado and sometimes Szell and even Solti. My dark horse entry is the Boult cycle with the LPO. I find it very good. Also, the live Toscanini set on Testament.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

The reason I like Klemperer in No. 2 is so often this work can sound like sleepytime music in movement 1 with that lullaby tune, but Klemp (and Furtwangler) gives it some more powerful oomph. Abbado, who I like so much in the other three symphonies, bores me in No. 2. Karajan and Bernstein fare better.

No. 2 is also a simpler work interpretively, with less stark contrast between the sections, so the inflexibility that for me taints Klemp in 3 & 4, and to some extent in 1, is not such a problem in 2. In fact I like the way it unfolds so naturally.


----------



## Gray Bean

I pulled the Klemperer EMI cycle down and listened straight through. I had not listened to this set in a very long time. I had forgotten how good it is! 
Lenny/Vienna is still my favorite, though. Just remembered..l also enjoyed the recent cycle with Andris Nelsons and the Boston Symphony Orchestra. Beautifully recorded and the playing of the BSO is absolutely fabulous.


----------



## flamencosketches

Gray Bean said:


> I pulled the Klemperer EMI cycle down and listened straight through. I had not listened to this set in a very long time. I had forgotten how good it is!
> Lenny/Vienna is still my favorite, though. Just remembered..l also enjoyed the recent cycle with Andris Nelsons and the Boston Symphony Orchestra. Beautifully recorded and the playing of the BSO is absolutely fabulous.


So good. Klemperer/Philharmonia is without a doubt my favorite Brahms cycle, and it is his recordings that hooked me on Brahms, in the first place (along with a very good recording of the 1st by Furtwängler & the Hamburg NDR SO, which is to date one of very few Furtwängler recordings that I really like). Never heard any of Lenny's Brahms, but being that I adore his Mahler and Beethoven, I suspect I would probably like it. (Not that Brahms is similar to either of them.)


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

......Processing error......


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Jochum EMI, Abbado, and the underrated Kempe are for me the most consistent cycles. And of course the Furtwängler Music & Arts set if you can handle the older sound. Other great historic sets include Weingartner, Toscanini (M&A or Testament), and Walter's 1950 mono set, now available on Sony.
> 
> Klemperer has an excellent 1st and 2nd but to me is not inspired or flexible enough in the 3rd and 4th.
> 
> Van Beinum, Walter (Sony stereo) and Kertesz are also very good. Hard to know what to recommend with Karajan since my loyalties are split between his three sets. I may even be inclined to rate the digital cycle the best if you really want a complete Karajan set. Now that I think about, my favorite 1st is from the 60s cycle, 2nd from the digital cycle, 3rd is the early Decca VPO, and 4th from the 70s cycle. So yeah pretty much all over the map.
> 
> I once owned Sanderling but sold it back due to being a bit bland.


Though I've never been really too fond of Furtwangler's and Abbado's Brahms, I agree with a good portion of your comments relating to your other favorite Brahms champions. I feel Jochum is one of the finest of all Brahms conductors. There is a genuine sense of affection he brings to this composer's music, particularly in his mono Berlin interpretations on DG, which I prefer somewhat to his later performances with the London Philharmonic....Indeed, Kempe was a superb and perhaps underrated conductor. His Berlin/Brahms Third is my #1 choice among all Thirds. His remaining opuses in both the Berlin set and his later Munich Philharmonic set are very fine....Among the older, pre stereo conductors, I favor Weingartner for his rather straightforward approach to Brahms, as well as the more subjective view taken by Hermann Abendroth in a few of his Brahms accounts. I'm not especially drawn here to Mengelberg or Knappertsbusch, though I'm fine with Toscanini's Philharmonia set.

I've always found a lot to like with Walter, and have managed to live comfortably with the tempo and dynamic differences he has displayed between his earlier mono New York and later stereo Columbia recordings. His lyrical approach to Brahms has been a constant source of appeal for me.

We're pretty close here too regarding Klemperer. even to the extent I feel his view of the Third doesn't quite make it to the level of satisfaction I derive from his concepts of the First and Second, though I do feel his Fourth does. Overall with Brahms, Klemperer's conveyance of the sense of grand scale and cumulative power continues at times to hold me in awe.

I've also considered both Van Beinum and Kertesz to be outstanding Brahms interpreters. Like Klemperer, Van Beinum brings a feeling of grandeur to Brahms, but without the former's tendency toward weightiness. There is somewhat of a lighter and at times more refreshing quality to Van Beinum's style of music making.....There were moments when Kertesz could also inspire with Brahms while projecting a balanced expression of both poetry and power. My only slight quibble is I've felt the recorded sound quality given him with the Vienna Phiharmonic on Decca could intermittently be somewhat brash during orchestral climaxes. But, other listeners might not agree.

I guess there will always be controversy associated with Karajan's style of music making. Personally, for years I didn't care for it, however, that view changed to some extent, and I came to appreciate a number of his interpretations, and not just those of Brahms' music but also those of others'. In any event, I do enjoy some of his readings from the 60s and 70s sets though his Brahms does not occupy the same level of appreciation as my aforementioned favorites do.

In closing, while I feel Sanderling's Brahms Fourth is a very fine one, I too generally find him a bit tedious. He can also be somewhat too slow for me with this composer.


----------



## starthrower

Solti/CSO for me. I also have Sanderling, Bernstrein, and Sawallisch. Enough Brahms for my lifetime.


----------



## Manxfeeder

When this topic startes in 2012, it seems like there was some initial enthusiasm for Gardiner, then it has substantially waned. Is anyone listening to Gardiner anymore?


----------



## Knorf

I've been loving Gardiner's Bach cantatas pilgrimage from 2000! And a number of the recordings on his own label, Soli Deo Gloria, have easily surpassed his previous recordings, not just with the cantatas. I haven't heard the newest Brahms recordings, however. But they are consistently recommended by many!


----------



## Heck148

starthrower said:


> Solti/CSO for me. I also have Sanderling, Bernstrein, and Sawawayllisch. Enough Brahms for my lifetime.


Solti/CSO is a very fine set throughout...I also have Toscanini/NBC which is excellent all the way....cosmic 4th....
I wish Monteux and Reiner had recorded complete sets... Brahms was Monteux's favorite composer, his Sym #2 with LSO is my overall favorite in a fiercely competitive field...it's really outstanding...Reiner's Brahms is top notch all the way - excellent #3 with CSO, great #4 with RoyalPO, and a thrilling live #2 with NYPO from 3/60....tmk knowledge, never recorded #1....his CSO Tragic Ov is superb, right up with Toscanini.


----------



## wkasimer

Heck148 said:


> I wish Monteux and Reiner had recorded complete sets... Brahms was Monteux's favorite composer, his Sym #2 with LSO is my overall favorite in a fiercely competitive field...it's really outstanding...


Well, there's always this set:


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Knorf said:


> I've been loving Gardiner's Bach cantatas pilgrimage from 2000! And a number of the recordings on his own label, Soli Deo Gloria, have easily surpassed his previous recordings, not just with the cantatas. I haven't heard the newest Brahms recordings, however. But they are consistently recommended by many!


I tend not to be much of a HIP fan, especially in Romantic repertoire, but Gardiner's Brahms Requiem is a major exception. Maybe my favorite stereo version, outshining even Klemperer. I have never heard a choir shape the melodic lines so expertly.


----------



## Heck148

wkasimer said:


> Well, there's always this set:
> 
> View attachment 137227


Cool!! Didn't know about this one....how is the sound quality?? If it's ok I may have to pick this one up...there was a Brahms 2 with VPO available at one point, iirc...the LSO was better....


----------



## flamencosketches

starthrower said:


> Solti/CSO for me. I also have Sanderling, Bernstrein, and Sawallisch. Enough Brahms for my lifetime.


I need to revisit Solti/CSO. I burned it to my hard drive years ago, way before I ever got into classical music, and used to listen to it at night sometimes when I was younger. I liked it well enough but this was back when I found Brahms's music meandering and not altogether interesting-far from my current perspective, in which he is probably a top-five composer for me.

I ordered the Jochum/London PO set (sans No.4) from Zoverstocks so I will be looking forward to giving it a listen in a month or so when it finally gets to me


----------



## Enthusiast

For me the best sets include Abbado (he is rarely my favourite conductor but he had a wonderful affectionate way with Brahms), Walter, Sanderling and Kempe (that set coupled with Klemperer's Beethoven is a true bargain). I have to thank Klemperer for helping me to get Brahms ... even if his muscular and rugged approach now seems to me to sell Brahms short. There are many others (Svetlanov, Karajan, Bernstein ... ) but those few sets would keep me happy for years. But then there is a very radical rethink from Zehetmair that will thrill some and horrify others: it needs to be heard!


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

The Solti set is OK, the 2nd is definitely the highlight (what a riproaring finale). As with all Solti I can find him too high-octane and not sensitive enough to the natural unfoldings of the music (I have similar feelings about the Revered Carlos C.) I really want to hear that Zehetmair. I haven’t got into the more “HIP” or “small band” Brahms cycles - I heard Harnoncourt once in the 1st and that scarred me for life:lol: But I do need to give Gardiner, Berglund, and their ilk a fair chance.


----------



## Merl

Enthusiast said:


> For me the best sets include Abbado (he is rarely my favourite conductor but he had a wonderful affectionate way with Brahms), Walter, Sanderling and Kempe (that set coupled with Klemperer's Beethoven is a true bargain). I have to thank Klemperer for helping me to get Brahms ... even if his muscular and rugged approach now seems to me to sell Brahms short. There are many others (Svetlanov, Karajan, Bernstein ... ) but those few sets would keep me happy for years. But then there is a very radical rethink from Zehetmair that will thrill some and horrify others: it needs to be heard!
> 
> View attachment 137264


I don't agree, Enthusiast. I don't think it would horrify anyone. If you like incredibly well-played Brahms, in excellent sound that is thrilling and is very well-realised it's a winner. It's fleet but it never feels hard-driven (like Szell for example), light (like Ticciati) or rushed. That 4th is just great. No wonder the cycle was a nominee for the 2019 International Classical Music Awards. The reviews of it are all very positive (even Gramophone who are often quite negative with newer Brahms cycles) and the French classical music site ResMusica gushed, 
_"Symphony No. 4 in E minor op. 98 is a kind of synthesis, of a heartbreaking tenderness at the beginning to the volcanic momentum in the climax of the finale. At the very end, let's listen to the last movement of Symphony No. 1 in C minor op. 68, imbued here with a jubilant tone and bursting with energy probably not found elsewhere in the post-Furtwänglerian era. "_

But hey....all I say to those that haven't heard it then give it a listen.


----------



## NLAdriaan

For a refreshing Brahms cycle, I would certainly try Harnoncourt. For 1-3 you have a great interpretation with an unleashed BPO. For 4 also Harnoncourt does not beat Carlos Kleiber.









You can as well ignore the piano-concertos with Buchbinder, they are not good. This box is an absolute bargain.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

I gave the EMI Klemperer another try. It is very beautiful, though still sounds a little trudgy for this work to me. It is interesting that the odd ducks for me in Klemp's Brahms cycle (No 4) and Beethoven cycle (Nos 5 & 7) happen to be the works where Carlos Kleiber excelled. These works need a lot of energy, and the Klemp EMI studio versions sound sedate, though still possessing many beautiful and musical virtues.

How different is the Danish 1954 live 4th from Klemp! This one is powerfully absorbing, full of energy throughout. One of my favorite versions of all, coupled with what IMO is his greatest Eroica as well. His live Beethoven 5th, 7th, and 9th on Testament are also among my favorites overall. I found my recordings from Berkshire Record Outlet, which seems to have them in stock and at better prices than Amazon.


----------



## Merl

Ive not heard Klempy's live 3rd and 4th, BHS. Is that Testament disc stereo or mono? Whats the sound like?


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Merl said:


> Ive not heard Klempy's live 3rd and 4th, BHS. Is that Testament disc stereo or mono? Whats the sound like?


Very present and full mono, perhaps some coughs and such since it is live. There is also a live 1957 Bavarian version with better sound. It is slower than the studio EMI, but strangely enough sounds more committed to me though not near the same octane level at the Danish.


----------



## gellio

For me, it's Harnoncourt!


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Wow! I found the Zehetmair and put on the 4th just to see if it lived up to Merl’s enthusiasm. This is honkin’ good Brahms, nothing like what I would expect from a “small-band” version. The first bars paint the windswept, raw, yet appropriately expressive portrait of a winter landscape that I always look for here, and the movement unfolds with perfectly natural tempo shifts and interpretive touches with a gorgeous overall sound (loving those horns). Yesterday I revisited the old standard Kleiber, and was struck at how it didn’t impress me nearly as much as it did before. Now this version really sounds like something fresh. I can’t stop listening now. I’ve gotta take in the rest of this cycle throughout the next couple days. It may not run you through the emotional washing machine that some of the most legendary performances do, but this is truly something special; one of the most beautiful, autumnal accounts of the 4th I’ve heard. Merl gets a big ‘ol tip ‘o the cap from me!:tiphat:


----------



## Enthusiast

Merl said:


> I don't agree, Enthusiast. I don't think it would horrify anyone. If you like incredibly well-played Brahms, in excellent sound that is thrilling and is very well-realised it's a winner. It's fleet but it never feels hard-driven (like Szell for example), light (like Ticciati) or rushed. That 4th is just great. No wonder the cycle was a nominee for the 2019 International Classical Music Awards. The reviews of it are all very positive (even Gramophone who are often quite negative with newer Brahms cycles) and the French classical music site ResMusica gushed,
> _"Symphony No. 4 in E minor op. 98 is a kind of synthesis, of a heartbreaking tenderness at the beginning to the volcanic momentum in the climax of the finale. At the very end, let's listen to the last movement of Symphony No. 1 in C minor op. 68, imbued here with a jubilant tone and bursting with energy probably not found elsewhere in the post-Furtwänglerian era. "_
> 
> But hey....all I say to those that haven't heard it then give it a listen.


I agree with the sentiment and the recommendation, Merl. That's why I recommended it. But there have been two or three negative or unsure posts about it since it came out.


----------



## Knorf

You lot who are keen on Zehetmair, would you rate it above Gardiner's most recent Brahms cycle on SDG?

I'm hunting a bit for a period instruments cycle. Not urgently, but I'm curious. I've become much more sold on period instruments for late Romantic music, especially for the gut strings and smaller-bore brass. The woodwinds aren't much different, but the other instruments are.


----------



## Gray Bean

I'm not sure how it compares to Gardiner. All the talk sent me to the Claves website. My copy is on the way.


----------



## Merl

Knorf said:


> You lot who are keen on Zehetmair, would you rate it above Gardiner's most recent Brahms cycle on SDG?


Yes, most definitely


----------



## Enthusiast

Knorf said:


> You lot who are keen on Zehetmair, would you rate it above Gardiner's most recent Brahms cycle on SDG?
> 
> I'm hunting a bit for a period instruments cycle. Not urgently, but I'm curious. I've become much more sold on period instruments for late Romantic music, especially for the gut strings and smaller-bore brass. The woodwinds aren't much different, but the other instruments are.


I am not really a Gardiner fan and, although I have heard a couple of the symphonies, I don't really know his set. But the Zehetmair is exceptional and - partly because it is so different to any other set I've heard - not one I would like to have missed. Try to hear it ... you'll probably jump for it.


----------



## Malx

Brahmsianhorn said:


> I tend not to be much of a HIP fan, especially in Romantic repertoire, but Gardiner's Brahms Requiem is a major exception. Maybe my favorite stereo version, outshining even Klemperer. I have never heard a choir shape the melodic lines so expertly.


Which Gardiner recording of the Requiem are you referring to?


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Malx said:


> Which Gardiner recording of the Requiem are you referring to?


Circa 1990 on Philips


----------



## NLAdriaan

Am listening to Zehetmaier, indeed a great new recording with a to me totally unknown ensemble.


----------



## NLAdriaan

NLAdriaan said:


> Am listening to Zehetmaier, indeed a great new recording with a to me totally unknown ensemble.


I ordered it from the Claves website. This is how all record labels should sell their stuff. A very convenient webshop, decent pricing, flat fee, free shipping, no taxes (at their end), Paypal. Just a few mouseclicks and Zehetmaiers Brahms is coming over from Switzerland

I have a question to the Brahms experts. I am looking for a quartet/quintet recording of Brahms, in the same spirit as Zehetmaier's Symphonies. Fresh, clear and light. I read about Belcea and Hagen, but am in need of advice. I do have the good old Amadeus Q box, but I am looking for a different approach. Which recording would you recommend as the one to have?


----------



## Malx

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Circa 1990 on Philips


Thanks for the reply - that is the recording I have. I did wonder if you were referring to the 2012 remake on the SDG label which some say is better recorded but a very similar performance.


----------



## Merl

NLAdriaan said:


> I ordered it from the Claves website. This is how all record labels should sell their stuff. A very convenient webshop, decent pricing, flat fee, free shipping, no taxes (at their end), Paypal. Just a few mouseclicks and Zehetmaiers Brahms is coming over from Switzerland
> 
> I have a question to the Brahms experts. I am looking for a quartet/quintet recording of Brahms, in the same spirit as Zehetmaier's Symphonies. Fresh, clear and light. I read about Belcea and Hagen, but am in need of advice. I do have the good old Amadeus Q box, but I am looking for a different approach. Which recording would you recommend as the one to have?


You can't go wrong with the Belcea, NLA. It's a great recording. I love the Takacs and Auryns in Brahms too.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Having listened to a bit more of the Zehetmair set, I can say it’s officially in my uppermost tier of Brahms cycles. I like NLAdriaan’s description - “fresh, clear and light.” Tempi are generally quick but Zehetmair conducts very flexibly and with lots of great personal touches. Listen to the first movement of the 3rd to get a taste of how he does this. The only time I don’t much care for this approach is in the first movement of the 1st where the opening with drum beats doesn’t have the proper gravitas, but that’s pretty minor. Really enjoying this entirely unique and convincing take on my favorite symphonies.


----------



## Gray Bean

NLAdriaan said:


> I ordered it from the Claves website. This is how all record labels should sell their stuff. A very convenient webshop, decent pricing, flat fee, free shipping, no taxes (at their end), Paypal. Just a few mouseclicks and Zehetmaiers Brahms is coming over from Switzerland
> 
> I have a question to the Brahms experts. I am looking for a quartet/quintet recording of Brahms, in the same spirit as Zehetmaier's Symphonies. Fresh, clear and light. I read about Belcea and Hagen, but am in need of advice. I do have the good old Amadeus Q box, but I am looking for a different approach. Which recording would you recommend as the one to have?


I second the recommendation of the Takacs Quartet on Hyperion. Wonderful. And I agree about the Claves website. I ordered the Zehetmaier cycle from them as well.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Finally sampled the Zehetmair on Claves. This may be a first. I can never remember hating a recording so much that I finally had to stop listening. It was literally that painful. What the heck was that?!

I got through the 1st symphony and the first three movements of the the 3rd. The 1st symphony literally sounded like 40 minutes of “Let me tell you how much I hate Brahms.” 

Everything was played in a passionless monotone manner. Why? 
Everything is rushed through. Why? 
All the phrases are clipped. Why? 
All the accented rhythms are softened in an exaggerated manner. Why? 
Everything is played metronomically and unmusically. Why?
All the rich orchestral writing was played with zero tone quality. Why?

When I got to one of my favorite of all symphonic movements, the Poco Allegretto 3rd movement of the 3rd symphony, the movement I chose for my final presentation in conducting class 20 years ago, I finally had enough. It was bludgeoned to death. Zero heart. Zero musicality. What is the point of this? What am I missing?


----------



## Marc

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Finally sampled the Zehetmair on Claves. This may be a first. I can never remember hating a recording so much that I finally had to stop listening. It was literally that painful. What the heck was that?!
> 
> I got through the 1st symphony and the first three movements of the the 3rd. The 1st symphony literally sounded like 40 minutes of "Let me tell you how much I hate Brahms."
> 
> Everything was played in a passionless monotone manner. Why?
> Everything is rushed through. Why?
> All the phrases are clipped. Why?
> All the accented rhythms are softened in an exaggerated manner. Why?
> Everything is played metronomically and unmusically. Why?
> All the rich orchestral writing was played with zero tone quality. Why?
> 
> When I got to one of my favorite of all symphonic movements, the Poco Allegretto 3rd movement of the 3rd symphony, the movement I chose for my final presentation in conducting class 20 years ago, I finally had enough. It was bludgeoned to death. Zero heart. Zero musicality. What is the point of this? What am I missing?


Only heard the samples on Presto Classical... decided not to go for it.
For a more 'light-weight' Brahms, I still prefer Mackerras (Telarc), who got the Scottish Chamber Orchestra playing with much more presence imho.

Some very good recordings are mentioned in this thread, and since I'm not a true Brahms connaisseur, I won't add that much. But if you're interested in how one and the same conductor is able to change his view upon these works, then it's nice to check out both Chailly sets. The first with the Concertgebouw Orkest, the second one with the Gewandhausorchester Leipzig. Almost the only similarity between the two sets is the quality of both orchestras.


----------



## Enthusiast

I don't know about these criticisms or Zehetmair's Brahms. I do not hear them as particularly lightweight - it isn't a huge orchestra, though - and some of the speeds (which are actually always changing without harming the flow but perhaps giving an impression of a turbulent heart) are actually slow. They certainly have little similarity with the Chailly or Mackerras efforts or with Gardiner. No heart? Perhaps in the same way that the Boulez Mahler was said to lack emotion (but listen to it and it seems to lack nothing), but I hear plenty of affection and warmth (certainly more than Mackerras and the later Chailly set manages). There is some clipping of phrases - a habit that used to irritate me but that I am now used to. Of course, it's down to taste and this set was always going to be strongly disliked by some. And just in case anyone thinks I am crazy I do also love Abbado, Walter, Sanderling, Kempe among others in these works.


----------



## Marc

Enthusiast said:


> I don't know about these criticisms or Zehetmair's Brahms. I do not hear them as particularly lightweight - it isn't a huge orchestra, though - and some of the speeds (which are actually always changing without harming the flow but perhaps giving an impression of a turbulent heart) are actually slow. They certainly have little similarity with the Chailly or Mackerras efforts or with Gardiner. No heart? Perhaps in the same way that the Boulez Mahler was said to lack emotion (but listen to it and it seems to lack nothing), but I hear plenty of affection and warmth (certainly more than Mackerras and the later Chailly set manages). There is some clipping of phrases - a habit that used to irritate me but that I am now used to. Of course, it's down to taste and this set was always going to be strongly disliked by some. And just in case anyone thinks I am crazy I do also love Abbado, Walter, Sanderling, Kempe among others in these works.


Referring to your "in case anyone thinks I'm crazy...", allow me to give you one advice: please do not link opposing personal preferences with craziness versus sanity or something like that. To me, everyone who trusts his/her own ears when listening to music, is completely sane.
I was only giving my own strictly personal opinion, which is rather normal (I think) on a board like this. You are impressed by Zehetmair and that's just awesome. Based on my listening experiences, I did not find his recordings impressive enough to purchase it. But it's still great music, and I have a great time enjoying other recordings. Isn't that just great?


----------



## Merl

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Finally sampled the Zehetmair on Claves. This may be a first. I can never remember hating a recording so much that I finally had to stop listening. It was literally that painful. What the heck was that?!
> 
> I got through the 1st symphony and the first three movements of the the 3rd. The 1st symphony literally sounded like 40 minutes of "Let me tell you how much I hate Brahms."
> 
> Everything was played in a passionless monotone manner. Why?
> Everything is rushed through. Why?
> All the phrases are clipped. Why?
> All the accented rhythms are softened in an exaggerated manner. Why?
> Everything is played metronomically and unmusically. Why?
> All the rich orchestral writing was played with zero tone quality. Why?
> 
> When I got to one of my favorite of all symphonic movements, the Poco Allegretto 3rd movement of the 3rd symphony, the movement I chose for my final presentation in conducting class 20 years ago, I finally had enough. It was bludgeoned to death. Zero heart. Zero musicality. What is the point of this? What am I missing?


Well who'd have guessed? I'm sooooo shocked.

Incidentally for those that believe Zehetmair is some kind of speed merchant, in the 3rd he clocks in at the same time as speed merchants like Klemps with the VSO and Cantelli. Super zippy Herbie is a minute quicker as is Ansermet. Loads of others are even faster. Walter weighs in at 2 minutes faster with the, NYPO. No need to rush, Bruno! Have you got a train to catch?


----------



## Enthusiast

Marc said:


> Referring to your "in case anyone thinks I'm crazy...", allow me to give you one advice: please do not link opposing personal preferences with craziness versus sanity or something like that. To me, everyone who trusts his/her own ears when listening to music, is completely sane.
> I was only giving my own strictly personal opinion, which is rather normal (I think) on a board like this. You are impressed by Zehetmair and that's just awesome. Based on my listening experiences, I did not find his recordings impressive enough to purchase it. But it's still great music, and I have a great time enjoying other recordings. Isn't that just great?


I thought it might be helpful for others considering this discussion to know a little about my other preferences for the works. I agree our individual tastes are as legitimate as our experience allows us to be (so someone who only knows one or two recordings might not be well-placed to choose the best performance of all).


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Merl said:


> Well who'd have guessed? I'm sooooo shocked.
> 
> Incidentally for those that believe Zehetmair is some kind of speed merchant, in the 3rd he clocks in at the same time as speed merchants like Klemps with the VSO and Cantelli. Super zippy Herbie is a minute quicker as is Ansermet. Loads of others are even faster. Walter weighs in at 2 minutes faster with the, NYPO. No need to rush, Bruno! Have you got a train to catch?


It's not the basic speed. It's the way he just barrels through phrases and transitions. It's soulless. Sorry that's just the way I hear it.


----------



## Helgi

I've listened to bits and pieces of the Zehetmair and it sounds interesting, if a little indecisive with all the tempo fluctuations. I'm not sure what to make of it.

Gardiner/ORR is more to my liking.


----------



## Knorf

Brahmsianhorn said:


> It's not the basic speed. It's the way he just barrels through phrases and transitions. It's soulless. Sorry that's just the way I hear it.


Not slowing down at every phrase transition: a clear sign of utterly lacking a soul. The undead are among us!


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

With Furtwangler, Jochum, Walter, Klemperer, you hear the Brahmsian phrases caressed. There is love for the music being communicated. I'd add Toscanini to this list too, despite his reputation for rigidity.

With Zehetmair I hear, "Screw that, we're going to perform this dry and emotionless." Why? What's the point? What am I missing? It sounds like 40 minutes of hating Brahms.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Knorf said:


> Not slowing down at every phrase transition: a clear sign of utterly lacking a soul. The undead are among us!


It's called musicality


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

The slow movements are Zehetmair’s weakness for me. The phrasing needs to be looser, more expressive. But my opinion remains on his faster movements - refreshing, surprisingly warm, and offering totally new insights into Brahms. For me it’s just Zehetmair’s vision of Brahms, not any sort of “historically correct” nonsense. Sure, you don’t get the opulence of the great German interpretations but that’s not what Tommy Z is trying to do. It’s not a cycle I can imagine myself wanting to hear an awful lot but sometimes I just want to hear something a bit different and this does the trick nicely. For my desert island I would unswervingly pick Furtwangler, Jochum, Walter and Klemperer but thank goodness I don’t live on a desert island.


----------



## Knorf

Brahmsianhorn said:


> It's called musicality


For sure. Slowing down: the way⁠-the only way-to prove you're not a corpse animated by a foul demonic spirit!


----------



## Helgi

He slows down plenty, though!

Where, why and to what effect is the issue for me at least.


----------



## Knorf

Helgi said:


> He slows down plenty, though!
> 
> Where, why and to what effect is the issue for me at least.


But Brahmsianhorn says he doesn't! Whom am I to believe?! Is the man an unliving animation of the foulest kind, literally without soul, or just a conductor who doesn't want to do things precisely the same way as someone did in the past?

Whom am I to trust, as I debate whether to purchase this recording? Zehetmair: Eldritch horror, or a conductor with real imagination?

It's quite the conundrum.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Allegro Con Brio said:


> The slow movements are Zehetmair's weakness for me. The phrasing needs to be looser, more expressive. But my opinion remains on his faster movements - refreshing, surprisingly warm, and offering totally new insights into Brahms. For me it's just Zehetmair's vision of Brahms, not any sort of "historically correct" nonsense. Sure, you don't get the opulence of the great German interpretations but that's not what Tommy Z is trying to do. It's not a cycle I can imagine myself wanting to hear an awful lot but sometimes I just want to hear something a bit different and this does the trick nicely. For my desert island I would unswervingly pick Furtwangler, Jochum, Walter and Klemperer but thank goodness I don't live on a desert island.


Yes, I forgot to mention that. The faster movements had some sign of life, because, well, they're fast movements. But the slow movements were awful. Completely devoid of charm.

I'm sorry not to mince words, but as a musician and Brahms lover I can't help it. I guess I'm a dinosaur even though I am still a few years from reaching 50.


----------



## Enthusiast

If you are a dinosaur then by age I am a trilobite. ^


----------



## Knorf

Here's a crazy idea. I mean, maybe I just didn't enough sleep, or maybe I'm soulless as well. After all, I don't even think souls are real! So, keep that in mind. I may just be off my rocker.

It's possible to like older recordings for what they do, and still enjoy new recordings, even though they might try something different and not just copy the past. I know, I know. It's probably madness.


----------



## Itullian

i would say for a good combination of performance and sound
the EMI Jochum is hard to beat.

For a DDD set, Abbado


----------



## Merl

Knorf said:


> Whom am I to trust, as I debate whether to purchase this recording? Zehetmair: Eldritch horror, or a conductor with real imagination?
> 
> It's quite the conundrum.


Listen to your soul, young man. Listen to your soul. :angel:


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Here's a crazier idea. How about just liking or not liking a recording based on the music you hear as opposed to some sort of context or agenda?


----------



## Heck148

Brahmsianhorn said:


> It's not the basic speed. It's the way he just barrels through phrases and transitions. It's soulless. Sorry that's just the way I hear it.


Yes, BH. good point...it isn't just speed, it's basic rhythm, and phrasing....very distracting when phrase endings are rushed, or pushed, 
"swallowed ", the next phrase is already taking off....of course, making ritardando at every phrase conclusion is an annoying mannerism as well...phrases need the right "punctuation", just as we hear with a great speaker...


----------



## Knorf

I learned everything there is to know about great speaking. From. William. Shatner. 

ALSO BRIAN BLESSED!!!!!


----------



## DavidA

Merl said:


> Listen to your soul, young man. Listen to your soul. :angel:


I usually listen to the music! :tiphat:


----------



## NLAdriaan

Brahmsianhorn said:


> It's not the basic speed. It's the way he just barrels through phrases and transitions. It's soulless. Sorry that's just the way I hear it.


Interesting, as this is exactly why I like Zehetmaiers approach. Brahms to me always comes to live when the dramatic 'romantic' ballast is lifted, and we can just enjoy the music on its own. All this heavy cream or goose liver seems to taste nice initially, but only makes your stomach burn.

Fortunately we have all these varieties on the menu, so we can all choose a la carte. I am in the spicy Kleiber/Harnoncourt/Zehetmaier camp and, allright, a sweet Knappertsbusch Brahms 3 andante for desert


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

I will be the first to admit that my favorite, Furtwangler, pushes and pulls the music. But IMO he does so successfully, whereas a Mengelberg or Bernstein can do so in a way that just sounds wrong and unnatural to me ear. Jochum also adjusts the tempo, but in less extreme a manner.

If I really want to hear the music sound "unforced," Walter, Klemperer or Reiner (in the 3rd and 4th) make a good choice. But they still apply basic musicianship.

Zehetmair actually sounds like he is doing the opposite of Furtwangler, forcing LACK of musicality on the score. It sounds unnatural, like reading poetry without any inflection or pause.

Again, is there a point to this that I am missing? Is it about sticking it to the man by proving the old ways are overrated? To me it sounds like an assault on Brahms more than anything.


----------



## Merl

Sometimes reading some of the posts on these threads remind me of this...

[video]https://dai.ly/x1wenv[/video]


----------



## Knorf

_Story Time!
_
In ancient legend, there lived a man, a terrible man, a man more monster than human, a man whose very fictional soul burned with consuming hatred for all others. Though a son of none other than Poseidon himself, this man was a bandit. He lived in a mountain pass near Mount Korydallos, and his very name awakened terror on all who contemplated crossing. The monster's name: Procrustes, "he who hammers out the metal." He waylaid all passers by, taking them captive and torturing them on a most clever device. It was a bed, of sorts, made of stone with stout leather thongs to tie down victims. Procrustes would force the prisoners to lie on the bed, and he strapped them down tight, tight enough to cause immense pain. Procrustes then compared the dimensions of the hapless prisoner to the dimensions of the bed. Any parts of the body that stuck out over the edges of the bed were hacked to size. And any that were smaller were hammered out and stretched, until they matched precisely. Such was the cleverness of the bed, that no victim ever exactly matched its dimensions. Finally, after a long, terrifying career that caused the road to be deemed totally unpassable, the great hero Theseus defeated Procrustes. Theseus then fitted Procrustes to the bed. Even Procrustes did not match the dimensions his own bed.


----------



## Merl

Knorf said:


> _Story Time!
> _
> In ancient legend, there lived a man, a terrible man, a man more monster than human, a man whose very fictional soul burned with consuming hatred for all others. Though a son of none other than Poseidon himself, this man was a bandit. He lived in a mountain pass near Mount Korydallos, and his very name awakened terror on all who contemplated crossing. The monster's name: Procrustes, "he who hammers out the metal." He waylaid all passers by, taking them captive and torturing them on a most clever device. It was a bed, of sorts, with stout leather thongs to tie down victims. Procrustes would force the prisoners to lie on the bed, and he strapped them down tight, tight enough to cause immense pain. Procrustes then compared the dimensions of the hapless prisoner to the dimensions of the bed. Any parts of the body that stuck out over the edges of the bed were hacked to size. And any that were smaller were hammered out and stretched, until they matched precisely. Such was the cleverness of the bed, that no victim ever exactly matched its dimensions. Finally, after a long, terrifying career that caused the road to be deemed totally unpassable, the great hero Theseus defeated Procrustes. Theseus then fitted Procrustes to the bed. Even Procrustes did not match the dimensions his own bed.


And what happened in the end?


----------



## Knorf

Merl said:


> And what happened in the end?


Let's just say, the punishment matched the crime.


----------



## Merl

Knorf said:


> Let's just say, the punishment matched the crime.


Man that's soulless!


----------



## BlackAdderLXX

So for a recap, what's the best Brahms cycle?


----------



## Knorf

Well, I gave a listen to the Zehetmair Brahms 4, with the Orchester Musikkollegium Winterthur.

And it's a very, _very_ good performance, and not at all weird. Not rushed. Not anti-Brahms. Not anti-music. Not stiff and metronomic, or anything close to that. Nothing aggressive or soulless. Or, if it is, more please. If this is soulless, than having a soul is clearly a liability. :lol:

This is an utterly convincing Brahms symphony recording, and not particularly weird at all. Actually, it's remarkably normal. There are faster pre-1970s recordings, for sure, and much-lauded ones from then that objectively pull and stretch time less than this recording does. It's not even rushed in the second movement, at all. In fact, Zehetmair slows down at basically all of the usual places and very convincingly and movingly.

I AM MOST DISAPPOINTED. I EXPECTED UNHOLY LIVING DEAD WEIRDNESS. 






Tl;DR: I have _no idea_ what Brahmsianhorn was listening to or thought he heard. Absolutely none.

ETA: ok, the third movement is a bit on the quick side, among the fastest I know, and there's one of two moments where the woodwinds lose phrasing a bit, but Zehetmair slows down for the Trio very normally and expectedly, and overall isn't too far out of normal at all. And the fourth movement is perfectly normal in tempo, and phrased quite conventionally but beautifully. DAMMIT.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Knorf said:


> Well, I gave a listen to the Zehetmair Brahms 4, with the Orchester Musikkollegium Winterthur.
> 
> And it's a very, _very_ good performance, and not at all weird. Not rushed. Not anti-Brahms. Not anti-music. Not stiff and metronomic, or anything close to that. Nothing aggressive or soulless. Or, if it is, more please. If this is soulless, than having a soul is clearly a liability. :lol:
> 
> This is an utterly convincing Brahms symphony recording, and not particularly weird at all. Actually, it's remarkably normal. There are faster pre-1970s recordings, for sure, and much-lauded ones from then that objectively pull and stretch time less than this recording does. It's not even rushed in the second movement, at all. In fact, Zehetmair slows down at basically all of the usual places and very convincingly and movingly.
> 
> I AM MOST DISAPPOINTED. I EXPECTED UNHOLY LIVING DEAD WEIRDNESS.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tl;DR: I have _no idea_ what Brahmsianhorn was listening to or thought he heard. Absolutely none.
> 
> ETA: ok, the third movement is a bit on the quick side, among the fastest I know, and there's one of two moments where the woodwinds lose phrasing a bit, but Zehetmair slows down for the Trio very normally and expectedly, and overall isn't too far out of normal at all. And the fourth movement is perfectly normal in tempo, and phrased quite conventionally but beautifully. DAMMIT.


Totally agreed. I have more mixed feelings on the other 3 (especially the 1st) but that 4th is a great one. I think the first movement sounds very free and buoyant, like a leaf floating in the autumn air, but still with plenty of dramatic impetus and warmth of sound.


----------



## Knorf

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Totally agreed. I have more mixed feelings on the other 3 (especially the 1st) but that 4th is a great one. I think the first movement sounds very free and buoyant, like a leaf floating in the autumn air, but still with plenty of dramatic impetus and warmth of sound.


I love your description. I picked the 4th just because it was the first one I found on YouTube. :lol: Realistically, I think it's not going to become an all-time favorite 4th for me, but it is certainly very good and I could see how it might be a valid favorite for any number of people.

The 4th that's excited me the most in recent weeks is Stan's!


----------



## Merl

Thank you ACB and Knorf. Proof absolute that I don't just like 'fast stuff' or weird stuff or new stuff but music that appeals to open-minded people who will give anything a try. Imagine what life would be like if you'd never given Sam-I-am the chance to talk you into liking green eggs and ham!


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

I only heard the first and part of the third.

Interesting how if someone says that a Klemperer recording is worse than getting hit by a bus, that’s perfectly fine. But if I call a Zehetmair performance soulless, I’m castigated by the TC police.

Incidentally, I never take it personally if someone dislikes a recording that I like. I prefer open discussion and debate without fear of reprimand.


----------



## 89Koechel

Brahmsianhorn - Fine work, in defending (even in these days) the ways of WF. Sure, he pushes-and-pulls the music, but (almost-entirely) in beneficial ways. The COHESIVENESS of the "WF" approach is always present, though, throughout any part of the Brahms' Four Symphonies. One can find a push-pull approach, at it's best, in two contrasting performances from (1) Felix Weingartner/1938/LSO ... and (2) Serge Koussevitzky/BSO ... in Brahms' 3rd Symphony. What one will NOT find, in either of these "ancient" performances, is a willful, arbitrary use of tempos, nor a slickness or superficiality that one might find, elsewhere.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

BlackAdderLXX said:


> So for a recap, what's the best Brahms cycle?


These are my choices, separated into essential versions and further listening.

♫ = top overall choice

◄ = top recommendation including sound quality

*Symphony No. 1*

Wilhelm Furtwängler (1951) (Tahra, Music & Arts) ♫
Willem Mengelberg (1940) (Philips)
Felix Weingartner (EMI)
Arturo Toscanini (1941) (RCA)
Herbert von Karajan (1964) (DG) ◄
Leonard Bernstein (DG)
Jascha Horenstein (Chesky)
Otto Klemperer (EMI)
Bruno Walter (1959) (Sony)
Karl Böhm (1960) (DG, Belart)

Further listening: Wilhelm Furtwängler (1952) (Tahra, DG), Wilhelm Furtwängler (EMI), Bruno Walter (1937) (Preiser, Opus Kura, Avid, Grammofono), Arturo Toscanini (1943) (Music & Arts), Arturo Toscanini (1951) (RCA, Andante), Karl Böhm (Orfeo), Claudio Abbado (1990) (DG), Herbert von Karajan (1987) (DG), Bruno Walter (1953) (Sony, IDI), Leopold Stokowski (1972) (Cala), Rafael Kubelik (1952) (Naxos), Eugen Jochum (DG), Eugen Jochum (EMI), Rudolf Kempe (Testament), Arturo Toscanini (1952) (Testament, Pristine), Hermann Abendroth (Biddulph), Eduard van Beinum (1958) (Philips), Leonard Bernstein (Sony), Guido Cantelli (Testament), Sir Adrian Boult (EMI)

*Symphony No. 2*

Wilhelm Furtwängler (1945) (DG, Music & Arts, Archipel, Andante) ♫
Pierre Monteux (1945) (RCA)
Felix Weingartner (EMI)
Otto Klemperer (EMI) ◄
Herbert von Karajan (1986) (DG)
Leonard Bernstein (DG)
Bruno Walter (Sony)

Further listening: Wilhelm Furtwängler (EMI), Bruno Walter (1953) (Sony, EMI Great Conductors, IDI), Bruno Walter (1950) (Tahra, AS, Music & Arts, Urania, Arkadia), Willem Mengelberg (Teldec, Naxos), Sir Thomas Beecham (EMI), Leopold Stokowski (Phild.) (Archipel), Rafael Kubelik (1957) (Decca), Eduard van Beinum (1958) (Philips), Karl Böhm (1956) (DG), Herbert von Karajan (1955) (EMI), Eugen Jochum (EMI), Eugen Jochum (DG), Fritz Busch (Dutton, EMI), Walter Damrosch (Biddulph), Rudolf Kempe (Testament), Leonard Bernstein (Sony), Arturo Toscanini (BBC), Arturo Toscanini (1952) (Testament, Pristine), Claudio Abbado (1988) (DG), William Steinberg (Millennium), Leopold Stokowski (Cala), Sir John Barbirolli (Royal Classics), Pierre Monteux (1959) (Decca)

*Symphony No. 3*

Wilhelm Furtwängler (1954) (DG, Music & Arts) ♫
Felix Weingartner (EMI)
Claudio Abbado (1989) (DG) ◄
Karl Böhm (1953) (Decca)
Guido Cantelli (EMI, Testament)
Rudolf Kempe (Testament, Warner)
Eduard van Beinum (1956) (Philips)
Eugen Jochum (EMI)

Further listening: Wilhelm Furtwängler (1949) (EMI), Sir John Barbirolli (1967) (Royal), Clemens Krauss (Preiser, Biddulph), Bruno Walter (1936) (Koch, Andante), Fritz Reiner (RCA), Bruno Walter (Sony), Leonard Bernstein (Sony), Istvan Kertesz (Decca), Otto Klemperer (EMI), Jascha Horenstein (Vox), Herbert von Karajan (Decca), Arturo Toscanini (1952) (Testament, Pristine), George Szell (Decca), Eugen Jochum (DG), Sergei Koussevitzky (Pearl), Leopold Stokowski (1928) (Biddulph), Herbert von Karajan (1978) (DG), Marin Alsop (Naxos), George Szell (Sony), Istvan Kertesz (Decca)

*Symphony No. 4*

Wilhelm Furtwängler (1949) (Tahra, Preiser, Seven Seas) ♫
Felix Weingartner (EMI, Living Era, Andante)
Arturo Toscanini (1935) (EMI, Arkadia)
Otto Klemperer (1954) (Testament)
Carlos Kleiber (DG) ◄
Claudio Abbado (DG)
Fritz Reiner (Chesky)
Eduard van Beinum (Philips)

Further listening: Wilhelm Furtwängler (1943) (Music & Arts), Wilhelm Furtwängler (1948) (EMI), Arturo Toscanini (1952) (Testament, Pristine), Victor de Sabata (DG, Andante), Leopold Stokowski (Phild.) (Archipel), Rudolf Kempe (Testament), Herbert von Karajan (1978) (DG), Willem Mengelberg (Teldec, Naxos), Leonard Bernstein (DG), Leopold Stokowski (IMP), Karl Böhm (1938) (Iron Needle), Eugen Jochum (EMI), Eugen Jochum (DG), Bruno Walter (Music & Arts), Hermann Abendroth (Biddulph), Karl Böhm (DG), Arturo Toscanini (RCA), Carlo Maria Giulini (DG), Bruno Walter (Sony)


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Here's my creme de la creme for all four, in descending order for each:

*No. 1*
Furtwangler/NDRS
Bohm/VPO stereo
Jochum/BPO or LSO
Klemperer/Philharmonia
Horenstein/LSO
Sanderling/Dresden

(honorable mentions: Toscanini, Bernstein/VPO, Giulini/VPO)

*No. 2*
Klemperer/Philharmonia
C. Kleiber/VPO (video only)
Walter/NYPO
Furtwangler/BPO (any of them)
Jochum/BPO or LSO
Walter/Columbia

(honorable mentions: Karajan, Abbado, Solti/CSO)

*No. 3*
Kempe/BPO
Furtwangler/BPO (any of them)
Abbado/BPO
Walter/Columbia
Jochum/BPO or LSO

(honorable mentions: Sanderling/Dresden, Klemperer)

*No. 4*
Furtwangler/BPO (either of them)
Jochum/BPO or LSO
Abbado/BPO
Toscanini/NBC (forgot which one if there's multiple)
C. Kleiber/VPO
Stokowski stereo

(honorable mentions: Bohm stereo, Zehetmair, Klemperer, Walter/Columbia, Reiner/RPO)

Some performances on my to-hear list from all eras and styles include Skrowaczewski, Weingartner, Harnoncourt, Gardiner, Van Beinum, Monteux, Barbirolli and more time with Karajan and Toscanini. So much Brahms, so little time...


----------



## BlackAdderLXX

Brahmsianhorn said:


> These are my choices, separated into essential versions and further listening.


Thanks. Any idea the dates on the Klemperer EMI cycle? I imagine the 50s?



Allegro Con Brio said:


> Here's my creme de la creme for all four, in descending order for each:
> snip
> Some performances on my to-hear list from all eras and styles include Skrowaczewski, Weingartner, Harnoncourt, Gardiner, Van Beinum, Monteux, Barbirolli and more time with Karajan and Toscanini. So much Brahms, so little time...


Thanks. The breakdown by era is helpful. I'm planning to try the Furtwangler and some of the other 30s-50s era standouts, but generally I can only tolerate them as a historical study due to the sound quality. For a purchase that I will actually enjoy listening to I need something a little more recent than 70 years ago.


----------



## Merl

BTW, Blackadder. There's a full list of all The Brahms cycles on this site, somewhere. I put it together a few years back. Here's just some of them:

Zehetmair
Sawallisch / LPO
Sawallisch / VSO
Ticciati / SCO
Levine / VPO
Levine / Chicago
Harnoncourt
Mravinsky 
Klemperer
Karajan 60s
Karajan 70s
Karajan 80s
Mengelberg / RCO
Gergiev / LSO
Kondrashin
Rosbaud / SWR
Mandeal
Knappertsbusch
Rickenbacker / Budapest SO
Masur / NYPO
Masur / Leipzig
Celibidache / Munich
Celibidache / Milan
Hengelbrock
Swarovsky / South German PO
Bosch / Aachen
Neeme Jarvi / LSO
Weingartner / LSO & LPO
Marturet
Steinberg / Pittsburgh
Ormandy
Ashkenazy / Cleveland
Dorati LSO + Minneapolis
Mackerras / SCO
Gielen SWR
Venzago
Zan Zweden
Nowak / RPO
Walter / NYPO
Walter / Columbia
Chailly / Gewandhaus
Nelson / BSO
Jarvi / BRSO
Dohnanyi / Cleveland
Dohnanyi / Philharmonia
Furtwangler VPO
Furtwangler BPO
Toscanini / NBC
Toscanini / Philharmonia
Boult 
Celibidache / Munich
Wand / NDR (studio)
Wand / NDR (live)
Koussevitsky
Manze
Sanderling / Philharmonia
Skrowaczewski Saarbrucken
Skrowaczewski / Halle
Bernstein / VPO
Bernstein / NYPO
Masur / Leipzig
Jochum / London
Jochum BPO
Kempe / Munich
Berglund / COE
Slatkin / Detroit
Kuhn
Maazel
Abendroth
Schmidt-Isserstedt NDR
Ansermet / OSR
Van Beinum RCO
Keilberth
Auguin
Kubelik / VPO
Norrington / SWR
Bychkov
Giulini / VPO
Giulini / Phil
Kubelik / BRSO
Barbirolli
Eschenbach
Gardiner
Suitner / Berlin
Solti / CSOKrivine
Asahina (Exton)
Loughran / Halle
Herbig
Mehta
Haitink / LSO live
Haitink / RCO
Haitink / Boston
Barenboim / Berlin
Barenboim / Chicago
Macal
Jochum / BPO
Axelrod
Haitink / BSO
Alsop
Noseda / Cadaques
Davis / BRSO
Orozco-Estrada
Fisch
Raiskin
Rowicki
Iimori
Jansons / BRSO
Jansons / Oslo
Various (Teatro Carlo Felice)
Swarowsky
Butt / LSO
Saraste 
Janowski
Jarvi / Bremen
Abravanel Utah
Young
Svetlanov
Schwarz / Seattle
Kobayashi / Yomiuri
Ozawa / Saito Kinen
Ozawa / Boston
Saccani / Budapest
Jurowski / RLPO
Jurowski / Pittsburgh
Kertesz
Belohlavek
Abbado
Thielemann
Sanderling / Berlin
Sanderling / Dresden
Dorati
Stokowski
Bohm
Krivine
Muti / Philadelphia
Zinman
Tremblay
Griffiths
Hughes / Stuttgart
Lehel
Rajter / Slovak PO
Welser-Most
Monteux


There's around 140 cycles listed above but there's actually more than this however I can't find the full list. If I've left any off just add them in the thread and I'll edit them in. It's annoying me where that complete list is, now.


----------



## Enthusiast

Personally, I do understand why some find Zehetmair's Brahms too shocking to listen to, too ugly even, but that's part of what makes the performances exciting and interesting to me. I am actually quite fussy about how the Brahms symphonies are played - he's not a composer I generally like to hear "reinvented" - and listening to Zehetmair I again and again hear things that make me think it is wrong ... only for him to justify it, to make genuinely Brahmsian sense of his approach. He goes to the right place but his route is sometimes unusual. I find this a thrilling experience. Will I like it as much when I know it so well that it doesn't surprise me? I think so but I may not like it as much as I do now. But who cares? For the moment I find it a thrilling Brahms experience.


----------



## gvn

Merl said:


> There's around 140 cycles listed above but there's actually more than this however I can't find the full list. If I've left any off just add them in the thread and I'll edit them in. It's annoying me where that complete list is, now.


An amazing list, and it's also amazing to see how many of them have distinctive (or even unique) merits of one kind or another.

Perhaps the most important accidental omission is Monteux. Most of the other gaps that occur to me are recentish sets that might postdate the original list (Rattle, Welser-Möst, etc.).

Note that not every item in the list is a complete cycle, e.g., Knappertsbusch lacks No. 1 (though some bootleg companies have marketed Klemperer's No. 1 as his), and "Furtwangler VPO" lacks No. 3. (But both of those are so important that they clearly need to be listed, regardless of completeness!)


----------



## flamencosketches

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Here's my creme de la creme for all four, in descending order for each:
> 
> *No. 1*
> Furtwangler/NDRS
> Bohm/VPO stereo
> Jochum/BPO or LSO
> Klemperer/Philharmonia
> Horenstein/LSO
> Sanderling/Dresden
> 
> (honorable mentions: Toscanini, Bernstein/VPO, Giulini/VPO)
> 
> *No. 2*
> Klemperer/Philharmonia
> C. Kleiber/VPO (video only)
> Walter/NYPO
> Furtwangler/BPO (any of them)
> Jochum/BPO or LSO
> Walter/Columbia
> 
> (honorable mentions: Karajan, Abbado, Solti/CSO)
> 
> *No. 3*
> Kempe/BPO
> Furtwangler/BPO (any of them)
> Abbado/BPO
> Walter/Columbia
> Jochum/BPO or LSO
> 
> (honorable mentions: Sanderling/Dresden, Klemperer)
> 
> *No. 4*
> Furtwangler/BPO (either of them)
> Jochum/BPO or LSO
> Abbado/BPO
> Toscanini/NBC (forgot which one if there's multiple)
> C. Kleiber/VPO
> Stokowski stereo
> 
> (honorable mentions: Bohm stereo, Zehetmair, Klemperer, Walter/Columbia, Reiner/RPO)
> 
> Some performances on my to-hear list from all eras and styles include Skrowaczewski, Weingartner, Harnoncourt, Gardiner, Van Beinum, Monteux, Barbirolli and more time with Karajan and Toscanini. So much Brahms, so little time...


Minor correction: the later Jochum cycle is with the LPO, not the LSO.


----------



## BlackAdderLXX

Is this Brahms cycle from Walter the "good" one? Thanks.


----------



## Helgi

My favourite Walter Brahms is from this:










All NYPO from the early 1950s I believe.


----------



## Merl

BlackAdderLXX said:


> Is this Brahms cycle from Walter the "good" one? Thanks.
> 
> View attachment 137699


There are two Walter sets and most people prefer the first mono one with the NYPO, from the early 50s and it is a generally quicker cycle with better playing and and although the sound is mono it's good mono but a bit congested at times, Tbh, although I like it a lot I rarely play it (as I have better cycles in much better sound probably) . The one pictured is the stereo Columbia cycle from the early 60s and some don't rate it quite as highly but it still has its suitors of which I'm one. I actually play it more than the mono set. 
The sound is far superior to the 50s set, unsurprisingly. I much prefer the 3rd from this cycle, btw and its a quick one (but not as fast as the mono one) . The 4th is more languid but beautifully done. Its a lovely set and I would recommend it. Not everyone feels the same but hey.

BTW, I did realise that some of the 'sets' weren't quite complete but didn't have time to note them down as I was in a rush to get the list up so not to lose my work. 
I'll add the missing ones in a minute.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

BlackAdderLXX said:


> Is this Brahms cycle from Walter the "good" one? Thanks.
> 
> View attachment 137699


I'm not a fan of sets, but Walter's is probably the most consistent. And his German Requiem is vastly underrated IMO. It has more flexibility and energy than the more famous Klemperer.


----------



## millionrainbows

If you can stand his nostrils.


----------



## Enthusiast

Merl said:


> There are two Walter sets and most people prefer the first mono one with the NYPO, from the early 50s and it is a generally quicker cycle with better playing and and although the sound is mono it's good mono but a bit congested at times, Tbh, although I like it a lot I rarely play it (as I have better cycles in much better sound probably) . The one pictured is the stereo Columbia cycle from the early 60s and some don't rate it quite as highly but it still has its suitors of which I'm one. I actually play it more than the mono set.
> The sound is far superior to the 50s set, unsurprisingly. I much prefer the 3rd from this cycle, btw and its a quick one (but not as fast as the mono one) . The 4th is more languid but beautifully done. Its a lovely set and I would recommend it. Not everyone feels the same but hey.
> 
> BTW, I did realise that some of the 'sets' weren't quite complete but didn't have time to note them down as I was in a rush to get the list up so not to lose my work.
> I'll add the missing ones in a minute.


Yes, I think I prefer the later one. Some don't but I have always liked the way Walter mellowed a little in his later years.


----------



## Animal the Drummer

Agree up to a point, but I wouldn't go as far as to say "always". For example I find his Columbia Schubert 5 and "Unfinished" on the sleepy side, whereas his Columbia "Great C major" is magnificent, just the right reading for someone like me for whom that piece can sometimes outstay its welcome a little.


----------



## wkasimer

> Symphony No. 4
> 
> Wilhelm Furtwängler (1949) (Tahra, Preiser, Seven Seas) ♫


By coincidence, I found a copy of this in a $2.00 bin yesterday.

To be honest, I found the first movement rather disjointed, as though the players weren't sure what WF was asking. And the intonation of the first violins wasn't particularly good. The rest was better, but still.... I preferred the coupling, Mozart #40.


----------



## BlackAdderLXX

Merl said:


> There are two Walter sets and most people prefer the first mono one with the NYPO, from the early 50s and it is a generally quicker cycle with better playing and and although the sound is mono it's good mono but a bit congested at times, Tbh, although I like it a lot I rarely play it (as I have better cycles in much better sound probably) . The one pictured is the stereo Columbia cycle from the early 60s and some don't rate it quite as highly but it still has its suitors of which I'm one. I actually play it more than the mono set.
> The sound is far superior to the 50s set, unsurprisingly. I much prefer the 3rd from this cycle, btw and its a quick one (but not as fast as the mono one) . The 4th is more languid but beautifully done. Its a lovely set and I would recommend it. Not everyone feels the same but hey.





Brahmsianhorn said:


> I'm not a fan of sets, but Walter's is probably the most consistent. And his German Requiem is vastly underrated IMO. It has more flexibility and energy than the more famous Klemperer.





Enthusiast said:


> Yes, I think I prefer the later one. Some don't but I have always liked the way Walter mellowed a little in his later years.


Thanks all. I have this cycle in my cue and wanted to see what the general thought was, because although I'm sure it dooms me to a lifetime of mediocre music, early 1950's and earlier recordings are a nonstarter for me as far as purchasing for enjoyment.


----------



## Knorf

Once again I find myself in full agreement with the gentleman currently living in Scotland. It's getting weird. No one on Talk Classical should agree this much. 

In the second Walter cycle, that Brahms 3 is one of the best, ever, the 4th is nearly as good, and the 1st and 2nd fail to suck.


----------



## Heck148

I listened today to the Zehetmair Brahms #4/IV [last mvt only] - I have to concur to a large degree with BH....

This is "small band Brahms" - it appears to be small string section - scaled down sound - accurate enough, but really rather wimpy. the woodwinds were small-sounding, with the lower choir - clarinets, horns, bassoons, sort of mushed together in a tubby, marshmallow-y sonority...the big climaxes, to my ears, were pretty seriously undernourished - not exactly Toscanini, Reiner, Solti, Furtwangler stuff...those guys really "give the green light" when necessary....

Zehetmair's conducting I found a bit problematic - the clipped phrase endings in the variations in the first part of the movement were a distraction - almost requiring a "restart" every 8 measures!! It did get better as the movement progressed, but hardly the wonderfully seamless, supple flow that Toscanini achieves between variations in his splendid rendition....Also, the tempo wasn't really slow, but it lacked forward momentum....a drive, a propulsion...a bit too stodgy for my taste...too much standing still...this music needs direction.

let me be clear, it wasn't _horrible_, or _agonizing_ to listen to, or a trial to be endured...it just wasn't anywhere near top level, for me...


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Heck148 said:


> too much standing still...this music needs direction.


Good way to put it



> let me be clear, it wasn't _horrible_, or _agonizing_ to listen to, or a trial to be endured...it just wasn't anywhere near top level, for me...


You should hear the 1st...


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Knorf said:


> Once again I find myself in full agreement with the gentleman currently living in Scotland. It's getting weird. No one on Talk Classical should agree this much.
> 
> In the second Walter cycle, that Brahms 3 is one of the best, ever, the 4th is nearly as good, and the 1st and 2nd fail to suck.


It's funny, people often mention the 1st last when talking about Walter's cycle. I actually think it's the best of the set. Lots of energy, power, perfectly paced.

My one issue with the 3rd is that the third movement Poco Allegretto is a little bit quick. The end of the initial main theme phrase sort of gets clipped. Jochum, Kempe, and Abbado are beautiful in this movement.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Walter’s conceptions of the 2nd and 3rd sound downright perfect to my ears, but the 4th is a bit underpowered and I don’t actually think I’ve heard either of his 1sts. I tend to prefer a quicker Poco Allegretto in the 3rd - the contrast is lost when it’s taken at the same tempo (or even slower like Bernstein!) as the Andante. Kempe’s 3rd is a candidate for my all time favorite individual Brahms symphony recording in stereo. White-hot energy in the outer movements, gorgeous but never wallowing songfulness in the middle movements.


----------



## Knorf

Brahmsianhorn said:


> It's funny, people often mention the 1st last when talking about Walter's cycle. I actually think it's the best of the set. Lots of energy, power, perfectly paced.
> 
> My one issue with the 3rd is that the third movement Poco Allegretto is a little bit quick. The end of the initial main theme phrase sort of gets clipped. Jochum, Kempe, and Abbado are beautiful in this movement.


Funny, I love the way Walter phrased the Poco Allegretto, staying true to the tempo marking.

But hearing your advocacy makes me want to revisit the 1st Symphony in the Columbia set. Off the top of my head, I can't remember why I was marginally less impressed with it than the 3rd and 4th. My memory is that the 2nd meanders a bit in Walter's hands. Eh, it's past time to hear these again.


----------



## BlackAdderLXX

Brahmsianhorn said:


> It's funny, people often mention the 1st last when talking about Walter's cycle. I actually think it's the best of the set. Lots of energy, power, perfectly paced.
> 
> My one issue with the 3rd is that the third movement Poco Allegretto is a little bit quick. The end of the initial main theme phrase sort of gets clipped. Jochum, Kempe, and Abbado are beautiful in this movement.


While I don't have a huge frame of reference, I think his first is beautiful. The best of those I've heard.


----------



## BlackAdderLXX

Question for you folks from a new Brahms listener. It seems to me that his symphonies are more about the orchestral 'textures' than the 'hooky' melodic motives than say Beethoven or even older composers. Would that be your experience as well? 

Also, I'm currently listening to Fritz Reiner's Brahms #3 and it is fantastic. In fact, I have yet to hear a recording of his that I didn't like (which isn't saying much). I think this is probably the oldest recording I've heard (1957) where I really don't find the sound quality taking me out of the moment. It seems as though Walter and Klemperer have their recordings from about the same era that are also pretty good SQ. I guess I've found my 'threshold'.


----------



## Heck148

BlackAdderLXX said:


> Also, I'm currently listening to Fritz Reiner's Brahms #3 and it is fantastic. In fact, I have yet to hear a recording of his that I didn't like (which isn't saying much). I think this is probably the oldest recording I've heard (1957) where I really don't find the sound quality taking me out of the moment.


Reiner's Brahms 3 is really excellent, and you're right, his recordings are uniformly top level, first-rate...He and Pierre Monteux had a remarkable consistency for "getting it right" musically speaking, over a wide range of repertoire.
Brahms 3 is the most difficult of his symphonies, and most difficult to conduct. It is a real challenge...


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

BlackAdderLXX said:


> Question for you folks from a new Brahms listener. It seems to me that his symphonies are more about the orchestral 'textures' than the 'hooky' melodic motives than say Beethoven or even older composers. Would that be your experience as well?


For me, the ravishing nature of Brahms's melodies is only topped by one composer - Schubert. Rarely do I find any moment in the symphonies where Brahms's sweeping, romantic songfulness is not instantly appealing (except maybe the 1st movement of the 1st which is more about drama than melodicism). Of course Brahms is such a complete composer - he was also a consummate mastery of harmony, chromaticism, orchestration, structure, and everything else so I feel like he gives me some of the most complete musical experiences ever. Which is why he is only topped by J.S. Bach in the field for my all-time favorite composer.


----------



## jegreenwood

BlackAdderLXX said:


> Question for you folks from a new Brahms listener.* It seems to me that his symphonies are more about the orchestral 'textures' than the 'hooky' melodic motives* than say Beethoven or even older composers. Would that be your experience as well?
> 
> Also, *I'm currently listening to Fritz Reiner's Brahms #3 *and it is fantastic. In fact, I have yet to hear a recording of his that I didn't like (which isn't saying much). I think this is probably the oldest recording I've heard (1957) where I really don't find the sound quality taking me out of the moment. It seems as though Walter and Klemperer have their recordings from about the same era that are also pretty good SQ. I guess I've found my 'threshold'.


If you've been listening to the third symphony, it's worth noting that Carlos Santana and Serge Gainsbourg, among others, turned the third movement into pop songs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahms's_Third_Symphony_in_popular_culture


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Kempe's 3rd is a candidate for my all time favorite individual Brahms symphony recording in stereo. White-hot energy in the outer movements, gorgeous but never wallowing songfulness in the middle movements.


It's very easy to agree with you on this one.


----------



## Marc

jegreenwood said:


> If you've been listening to the third symphony, it's worth noting that Carlos Santana and Serge Gainsbourg, among others, turned the third movement into pop songs.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahms's_Third_Symphony_in_popular_culture


Not surprising actually. I immediately fell in love with that movement when I first heard it. (And it's everlasting love.)


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Merl said:


> BTW, Blackadder. There's a full list of all The Brahms cycles on this site I put it together a few years back. Here's just some of them:
> 
> There's around 140 cycles listed above but there's actually more than this however I can't find the full list. If I've left any off just add them in the thread and I'll edit them in. It's annoying me where that complete list is, now.


Kempe Berlin Philharmonic


----------



## realdealblues

I've got probably 40-60 Brahms cycles and probably 100 incomplete and 1 off recordings. If you want a complete cycle I don't think you can go wrong with any of these.

Abbado/Berlin Philharmonic
Jochum/London Philharmonic
Klemperer/Philharmonia Orchestra
Levine/Chicago Symphony
Sanderling/Staatskapelle Dresden
Solti/Chicago Symphony
Walter/Columbia Symphony
Wand/NDR Symphony

I also like Dohnanyi's Cleveland cycle. Bernstein's Vienna cycle is interesting to hear but can be an acquired taste. All of HVK's are worth hearing but again for some they are an acquired taste. Kempe's cycle is interesting to hear as well. I wouldn't want to be without Monteux's 2nd, Reiner's 3rd, Munch's 1st, 2nd & 4th, Giulini's L.A. 1st and 2nd and a few others but for someone who is new to Brahms or is just looking for a cycle to enjoy for many years all of the ones listed have strong points. 

My personal favorite is still probably Levine w/Chicago or Wand w/NDR for a more modern recordings with truly excellent sound and Klemperer & Walter for more classic recordings but I like all of the above and have gotten years of enjoyment from all of them.


----------



## BlackAdderLXX

realdealblues said:


> I've got probably 40-60 Brahms cycles and probably 100 incomplete and 1 off recordings. If you want a complete cycle I don't think you can go wrong with any of these.
> 
> Abbado/Berlin Philharmonic
> Jochum/London Philharmonic
> Klemperer/Philharmonia Orchestra
> Levine/Chicago Symphony
> Sanderling/Staatskapelle Dresden
> Solti/Chicago Symphony
> Walter/Columbia Symphony
> Wand/NDR Symphony
> 
> My personal favorite is still probably Levine w/Chicago or Wand w/NDR for a more modern recordings with truly excellent sound and Klemperer & Walter for more classic recordings but I like all of the above and have gotten years of enjoyment from all of them.


I haven't listened through all of these complete cycles, but listened to at least one symphony from each of these (except Sanderling - new one to try thanks) and they are all excellent. This thread is making me into a Brahms fan. I think I'm finding myself coming down where you do as well with Walter/Klemperer and Levine being favorites, though I would add Abbado. I just ordered his symphony box from the Presto sale...


----------



## jegreenwood

BlackAdderLXX said:


> I haven't listened through all of these complete cycles, but listened to at least one symphony from each of these (except Sanderling - new one to try thanks) and they are all excellent. This thread is making me into a Brahms fan. I think I'm finding myself coming down where you do as well with Walter/Klemperer and Levine being favorites, though I would add Abbado. *I just ordered his symphony box from the Presto sale...*


As did I when it as first released, driven primarily by the fact that it was a good value when compared with the price of the Brahms set alone.


----------



## Eclectic Al

You suggest £46 for the Abbado set - with BPO. Ignoring the Brahms question, you can get the whole DG Abbado BPO recordings for c£70. Buy that, and you get the Brahms in the set, along with much else.


----------



## BlackAdderLXX

jegreenwood said:


> As did I when it as first released, driven primarily by the fact that it was a good value when compared with the price of the Brahms set alone.


Yeah, I've had my eye on the Mendelssohn set too, which is in the box. That plus the Brahms and then a bunch of other works for less than Brahms+Mendelssohn was a yes for me. I hear mixed things about Abbado's later stuff but everything I've heard from those two sets sounds great to me so it was a no brainer. Now to wait.......


----------



## realdealblues

BlackAdderLXX said:


> Yeah, I've had my eye on the Mendelssohn set too, which is in the box. That plus the Brahms and then a bunch of other works for less than Brahms+Mendelssohn was a yes for me. I hear mixed things about Abbado's later stuff but everything I've heard from those two sets sounds great to me so it was a no brainer. Now to wait.......


I enjoy the Mendelssohn as well although I think Dohnanyi/Vienna is my favorite. Abbado can be a mixed bag. His Brahms and Mendelssohn are definitely high points in his career for Symphonic output (in my opinion of course). A lot of them are just "ok". Not all of them are "dreadful". His last Beethoven cycle for instance is good. It's just not fantastic in my book but it's good. Same can be said for a lot of his other recordings. There are things that are enjoyable, there's just a lot of things that were done better by others as a general rule of thumb in my book and whom I would prefer to listen to more frequently, but I'm sure you will find things you enjoy in the Abbado box.


----------



## BlackAdderLXX

realdealblues said:


> I enjoy the Mendelssohn as well although I think Dohnanyi/Vienna is my favorite. Abbado can be a mixed bag. His Brahms and Mendelssohn are definitely high points in his career for Symphonic output (in my opinion of course). A lot of them are just "ok". Not all of them are "dreadful". His last Beethoven cycle for instance is good. It's just not fantastic in my book but it's good. Same can be said for a lot of his other recordings. There are things that are enjoyable, there's just a lot of things that were done better by others as a general rule of thumb in my book and whom I would prefer to listen to more frequently, but I'm sure you will find things you enjoy in the Abbado box.


Hopefully there will be some other gems in there, but worst case I have the Brahms/Mendelssohn! Also, I just picked up the Dohnanyi and I agree it is amazing.


----------



## DaddyGeorge

BlackAdderLXX said:


> Yeah, I've had my eye on the Mendelssohn set too, which is in the box. That plus the Brahms and then a bunch of other works for less than Brahms+Mendelssohn was a yes for me. I hear mixed things about Abbado's later stuff but everything I've heard from those two sets sounds great to me so it was a no brainer. Now to wait.......


You may also consider *Abbado's Symphony Box*. You will get a complete symphonic work by Beethoven, Schubert, Mendelssohn, Brahms, Bruckner, Mahler and, as a bonus, a selection of symphonies by Mozart and Haydn. Since Abbado is my very favorite conductor, I don't think buying this set is a mistake.


----------



## BlackAdderLXX

DaddyGeorge said:


> You may also consider *Abbado's Symphony Box*. You will get a complete symphonic work by Beethoven, Schubert, Mendelssohn, Brahms, Bruckner, Mahler and, as a bonus, a selection of symphonies by Mozart and Haydn. Since Abbado is my very favorite conductor, I don't think buying this set is a mistake.


I agree. That's actually the one we're talking about. They have a sale on Presto where this is like 50% off. I had been planning to get the Abbado Brahms cycle and Mendelssohn cycle and the symphony box ended up being about the same price or a little cheaper. So I'm looking at anything at all from the others as being a total bonus. Only bummer is it's backordered so they're saying it's going to be August before I see it, but I'm able to listen to it on Amazon music in the meantime. Thanks for the confirmation though!


----------



## 89Koechel

William Kasimer - Well, even as a present/future member of the WF Society, one can say that not ALL of his performances of Beethoven/Brahms were uniformly-fine. It's sure that SOMETIMES (as in the '49 Brahms' 4th) that conductor and orch. were not quite on the same page, so good comments! ... BTW, we can always look-back (thru YouTube) to that 1948 rehearsal (in London) of the last movement of a Brahms' 4th (WF with, I think the Berlin Phil). It only lasts 5 minutes, 3 seconds, but shows how WF and an orchestra could simply TAKE-OFF in that last movement ... full of impetuousness and brio. I think this is pretty close to what Brahms wanted. Maybe in Brahms it's difficult to put-together an entire interpretation, that encompasses what "we'd like", with what the composer wanted, overall.


----------



## 89Koechel

BlackAdder - You mentioned Reiner in Brahms' 3rd/1957 recording. The sonic engineering of this time was nonpareil, and many RCA (LP) issues of the time are still on auction blocks, and can "demand" somewhat high prices. As for the performance, this is from "The RCA Bible", by Jonathan Valin ..... " ... This is simply one of the greatest symphonies ever written, and Reiner and the CSO play it superbly well. Along with the warmer Walter/Columbia and the mighty/majestic Klemperer/EMI, I consider the Reiner to be one of the best Thirds in stereo. ... Sonically the disc is a mixed lot with mostly-sweet strings but, on side one, some bright spotlighting on winds and brass. ... bass is adequate, and dynamics good. Transparency is fair; ditto imaging (marred by the overmodulated brass and by strings that are separated a little too far to the left). A great favorite of mine despite its defects and an indisputably great performance. Recorded 1955." ... Well, there you go, for an assessment from not too long ago, and hopefully, valid as ever! ... Good luck with Abbado, Jochum and the many others, but I think you'll find that Reiner/CSO will have a SOLID place in your (and other) considerations of Brahms' 3rd, no matter what. ... Good luck, and thanks!


----------



## jegreenwood

DaddyGeorge said:


> You may also consider *Abbado's Symphony Box*. You will get a complete symphonic work by Beethoven, Schubert, Mendelssohn, Brahms, Bruckner, Mahler and, as a bonus, a selection of symphonies by Mozart and Haydn. Since Abbado is my very favorite conductor, I don't think buying this set is a mistake.


That's the box I was referring to. The Abbado/BPO box would overlap, but a number of recordings in the Abbado Symphony box are with other orchestras.


----------



## jegreenwood

DaddyGeorge said:


> You may also consider *Abbado's Symphony Box*. You will get a complete symphonic work by Beethoven, Schubert, Mendelssohn, Brahms, Bruckner, Mahler and, as a bonus, a selection of symphonies by Mozart and Haydn. Since Abbado is my very favorite conductor, I don't think buying this set is a mistake.


That's the box I was referring to. The Abbado/BPO box would overlap, but a number of recordings in the Abbado Symphony box are with other orchestras.


----------



## BlackAdderLXX

89Koechel said:


> BlackAdder - You mentioned Reiner in Brahms' 3rd/1957 recording. The sonic engineering of this time was nonpareil, and many RCA (LP) issues of the time are still on auction blocks, and can "demand" somewhat high prices. As for the performance, this is from "The RCA Bible", by Jonathan Valin ..... " ... This is simply one of the greatest symphonies ever written, and Reiner and the CSO play it superbly well. Along with the warmer Walter/Columbia and the mighty/majestic Klemperer/EMI, I consider the Reiner to be one of the best Thirds in stereo. ... Sonically the disc is a mixed lot with mostly-sweet strings but, on side one, some bright spotlighting on winds and brass. ... bass is adequate, and dynamics good. Transparency is fair; ditto imaging (marred by the overmodulated brass and by strings that are separated a little too far to the left). A great favorite of mine despite its defects and an indisputably great performance. Recorded 1955." ... Well, there you go, for an assessment from not too long ago, and hopefully, valid as ever! ... Good luck with Abbado, Jochum and the many others, but I think you'll find that Reiner/CSO will have a SOLID place in your (and other) considerations of Brahms' 3rd, no matter what. ... Good luck, and thanks!


The thing about Reiner is that even though the sonics are "old" (I really can't abide bad sound) they were fantastic back in what was that 1957? so they still hold up great. They must have been absolute state of the art at that time. Then his conducting and the performance of the orchestra is one of the most incredible things I've heard. I just wish that there was a box set of his works still in print (like the RCA box.) Anyway, I completely agree. I was actually looking around on Presto last night for some of his other 'Blue Chip" recordings because I'm really becoming enamored of the old slave driver's work. I've got his Brahms 3, Mussorgsky Pictures, and Respighi Pines in my shopping cart on Presto.


----------



## Guest

A am always amazed at what people like and don't like. I've found Abbado's Brahms to be some of the most uninspired music making I have ever heard.

Brahms is a composer for whom I have no absolute favorites. So many different views of the music and non-obvious aspects to bring out. One the I really enjoy that rarely gets mentioned in Kertesz/WPO/Decca. Never had a high profile CD release. Was first brought out on a pair of "Double Decca" issues, and now to be found of Australian Eloquence.

Another "under the radar" set is Ansermet/OSR, who brings some refreshing light and transparency to the scores.


----------



## Enthusiast

I sometimes think that listeners' problems with the Brahms symphonies are partly down to an expectation of drama (like some of his later chamber music) but that's not really what these wonderful works are about. I blame Klemperer's rugged recordings - great in their way - for fostering this expectation.

You don't need to be an Abbado fan to love his Brahms. I am not that fond of his Schubert or his Mendelssohn cycles and I'm even slightly ambivalent about his Mahler ... but his Brahms cycle is an absolute delight and definitely belongs among the very great recordings of the Brahms symphonies. I didn't buy it as a set but one by one, finding one so good that I had to get more. I do like many other sets (I'm sure I've listed them in this thread) but Abbado's Brahms is special even among the most exalted company. He really cherished and loved the works into life and managed this without so much as a second of indulgence!


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

I love Abbado’s Brahms for the beautiful phrasing, perfect pacing, and opulent playing; but I will say this: if you don’t like the “heavy, Germanic sound” in Brahms then you will want to stay away. Sometimes the thick, indulgent Berlin strings can just dominate everything else and drown out the inner textures (don’t know if this is the fault of recording engineers) - not to the extent that Karajan’s recordings often do, but it’s definitely present. When you do hear the woodwinds, they do some things that I seldom hear other conductors do with them.


----------



## Animal the Drummer

It's great that Abbado's recordings can give such enjoyment and I don't regard Klemperer's as the last word on the Brahms symphonies, but they speak to me more than Abbado's, which I found a trifle pallid when I tried them. Tastes differ, and a good thing too. :tiphat:


----------



## Heck148

BlackAdderLXX said:


> The thing about Reiner is that even though the sonics are "old" (I really can't abide bad sound) they were fantastic back in what was that 1957? so they still hold up great. They must have been absolute state of the art at that time. Then his conducting and the performance of the orchestra is one of the most incredible things I've heard. I just wish that there was a box set of his works still in print (like the RCA box.) Anyway, I completely agree. I was actually looking around on Presto last night for some of his other 'Blue Chip" recordings because I'm really becoming enamored of the old slave driver's work. *I've got his Brahms 3, Mussorgsky Pictures, and Respighi Pines* in my shopping cart on Presto.


Great!! that's some real A+++ plus music making there!! Reiner/CSO produced so many winners - check out the Tchaikovsky #6 if you get the chance...


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

If you want Brahms in full, opulent sound, IMO you cannot do better than Abbado/BPO. Only in the 2nd do I find him somewhat lethergic, mainly in the first movement. The 1st is not quite as powerful as Karajan, Klemperer, or Bernstein, but it is still among the best. The 3rd is my top choice for this symphony excepting historical options, and the 4th only takes a back seat to the uniquely inspired Kleiber.

The couplings, offering the three smaller orchestral works as well as choral/orchestral, make this set even more of a slam dunk. In a sense, this set codifies traditional Brahms and will always be an invaluable reference point for that reason alone.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

My top recommendations for each of the Brahms symphonies individually are set out below, with the supplemental historical purchase being the integral Furtwangler Music & Arts set.


----------



## Animal the Drummer

My favourite among the symphonies has always been no.3 but that Karajan no.1 is very, very special, my single most listened-to Brahms symphony recording and one of my favourites of any symphony ever.


----------



## BlackAdderLXX

Heck148 said:


> Great!! that's some real A+++ plus music making there!! Reiner/CSO produced so many winners - check out the Tchaikovsky #6 if you get the chance...


Thanks. I'll check it out.

If anyone has any other Reiner recordings they recommend (that aren't opera) lay 'em on me!


----------



## Heck148

BlackAdderLXX said:


> Thanks. I'll check it out.
> 
> If anyone has any other Reiner recordings they recommend (that aren't opera) lay 'em on me!


His entire discography is outstanding, you really can't miss. 
Richard Strauss is top drawer, same with Bartok, great Beethoven, Brahms, Mozart, Haydn. Reiner only recorded two Mahler works - Sym #4, DLvDE, but they are both outstanding...also check out his French and Spanish recordings - Ravel, Debussy, and the "Spanish" Disc (Falla. Granados, etc)....


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

BlackAdderLXX said:


> Thanks. I'll check it out.
> 
> If anyone has any other Reiner recordings they recommend (that aren't opera) lay 'em on me!


Scheherazade, Respighi tone poems, and Bartok orchestral music are must-hears. Also his Brahms 2nd piano concerto with Gilels and Brahms 4 with the RPO (only on YouTube). I often enjoy his recordings just because of the amazing sound even if the interpretations aren't always my favorite.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Not to veer off topic, but these are my favorite Reiner recordings. IMO there are far better conductors for the German Classical/Romantics, but in this repertoire he excelled. I don't think his Scheherazade finds the same sensual spirit as Stokowski, Kondrashin, or Beecham, but others love it for the technical brilliance.


----------



## BlackAdderLXX

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Not to veer off topic, but these are my favorite Reiner recordings. IMO there are far better conductors for the German Classical/Romantics, but in this repertoire he excelled. I don't think his Scheherazade finds the same sensual spirit as Stokowski, Kondrashin, or Beecham, but others love it for the technical brilliance.


Thanks. I picked up Fountains and Pictures today after streaming them a while.


----------



## Heck148

BlackAdderLXX said:


> Thanks. I picked up Fountains and Pictures today after streaming them a while.


These are all complete winners...great stuff...


----------



## realdealblues

BlackAdderLXX said:


> Thanks. I'll check it out.
> 
> If anyone has any other Reiner recordings they recommend (that aren't opera) lay 'em on me!


Pretty much everything Reiner did was great. His output is one of those rare few where pretty much everything is consistently excellent. I put Munch & Szell into those categories as well. I don't believe any recording they made is a total dud. There might be a few that I would consider less than excellent but all are "very good" at the very least!


----------



## 89Koechel

BlackAdder - Very good! ... BTW, the old Fritz Reiner Society produced a few reissues of it's own. I still have FRS 1 - off-the-air TV recordings of Mendelssohn 4th and Bartok's Divertimento. The sound is OK, although certainly not the great RCAs of the '50s/'60s. If anyone wants a dub, let me know.


----------



## Heck148

89Koechel said:


> BlackAdder - Very good! ... BTW, the old Fritz Reiner Society produced a few reissues of it's own. I still have FRS 1 - off-the-air TV recordings of Mendelssohn 4th and Bartok's Divertimento. The sound is OK, although certainly not the great RCAs of the '50s/'60s. If anyone wants a dub, let me know.


I'd love a copy of the Mendelssohn and Bartok...those are 2 that I don't have...
There are quite a few non- commerciallly released Reiner recordings available... the CSO archives, and the WBAI broadcast tapes are quite a treasure trove....sound is ok, not great, but passable...there are also the TV video tapes available on dvd...


----------



## 89Koechel

(Mendelssohn and Bartok) - Fine performances; decent sonics - I don't think you'll find these, anywhere else. My dubs are completed. ... email address is -> [email protected].


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Heck148 said:


> Brahms was Monteux's favorite composer, his Sym #2 with LSO is my overall favorite in a fiercely competitive field...it's really outstanding...


Quite a few years back I had owned this performance, but discarded it after having failed to ever give it a decent listen. Based on your above mention of it, I became curious and decided to finally give it a chance. I must say I am happily surprised. In fact, I compared it with Monteux's Vienna Philharmonic recording which was made in 1959, only three years before his London Symphony offering. Yes, I find the latter version considerably more satisfying than the former. No sludge and no drag---it breathes and flows naturally, and the musical nuances Monteux brings to bear are a real pleasure to listen to. I'm obviously very pleased I caught your positive comments.

While I'm focused on the Brahms Second, I'd like to single out another extremely fine interpretation I had completely forgotten about and which has also long been a personal favorite of mine: William Steinberg's with the Pittsburgh Symphony on the former Command label. I've previously noticed others on this site have bestowed deserved praise on it as well.


----------



## 89Koechel

Brahmsian Colors - Yes, Monteux ... "the unfailing one", when it ever came-to concert, or recorded performances of so MANY works, in the standard repertoire! It would be difficult to find an ORDINARY performance/recording of Monteux's (although I'm sure there could be one or two, from so very many), and we're glad to know that he (like you) focused on Brahms' 2nd Symphony. ... I'd still recommend Horenstein, and would like to go-back, just a bit, to what the "old man" - Toscanini - could do with the 2nd, and the others. After listening to some of Toscanini/NYP in the years ending in 1936, I find a "gentleness" of tempo (compared, maybe, with later NBC recordings) in much of what AT was accomplishing, in those days. His unique form of SHAPING is always there (with a strong discipline), but we don't find, in certain cases, the "hard-bitten" ... almost-brittle ... character that seeps into some of his latest recordings. ... Well, this is just another way of saying that we should LISTEN to Monteux, Toscanini, WF, von Beinum and the others ... while respecting the many recordings of modern (post-WW2, at the minimum) days - Abbado, even Herb von Karajan, Zehetmair, and anyone else. Anyone can "name their poison", as the best of all complete sets, or in the individual Symphonies, and we'll, surely, "shoot them down", or support their opinions, or the area, in-between. We're simply BLESSED with many interpretations of the Brahms' Four, and each one of us will favor one or another, w/o neglecting the WHOLE of excellent interpretations/recordings. Would you agree?


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

89Koechel said:


> We're simply BLESSED with many interpretations of the Brahms' Four...Would you agree?


Indeed, and sites like You Tube certainly provide a goldmine of opportunities with which to hone one's listening skills, about the most essential, I believe, being the broadening of our perception and appreciation of (or dissatisfaction with) the kinds of nuances various conductors have brought to bear. Having long familiarized myself with a veritable storehouse of Brahms recordings, and with rare exceptions, I feel I've reached a point where I've become well settled with my personal favorite Brahms Symphony interpretations.


----------



## Simplicissimus

Brahmsian Colors said:


> Indeed, and sites like You Tube certainly provide a goldmine of opportunities with which to hone one's listening skills, about the most essential, I believe, being the broadening of our perception and appreciation of (or dissatisfaction with) the kinds of nuances various conductors have brought to bear. Having long familiarized myself with a veritable storehouse of Brahms recordings, and with rare exceptions, I feel I've reached a point where I've become well settled with my personal favorite Brahms Symphony interpretations.


I've settled into four cycles that cover my Brahms symphony moods: Sawallisch/Wiener Symphoniker to put a smile on my face, Dorati for Romantic intensity, Ormandy for lushness and full sound, and Walter for Brahms 101. I know these are not very well thought of recordings, but after trying many, these are the ones that click with me, and I've given up second-guessing myself because of what critics and other listeners think are better. It's funny, too, because my preferences for Beethoven symphony cycles track closely with what we're "supposed" to like (e.g., Wand and Szell). For me, Brahms is a little more personal and closer to my heart than Beethoven.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Simplicissimus said:


> I've settled into four cycles that cover my Brahms symphony moods:...after trying many, these are the ones that click with me, and I've given up second-guessing myself because of what critics and other listeners think are better.


BRAVO! I strongly believe this is the best approach one can utilize in the quest for discovering one's favorite performances. There's certainly nothing wrong with using others' recommendations as a basis for trial listening, but you are correct. When it comes down to what it's all about, it has to "click" with you, not just the reviewers or critics. My best wishes for good listening.:tiphat::cheers:


----------



## Gray Bean

For me a BIG part of the fun is auditioning new recordings be they reissues or newbies. Sure, there are some Brahms cycles that are my go to sets: Bernstein/Vienna, Abbado/Berlin, Jochum/LPO, Boult/LPO, Walter/Columbia SO, Wand/NDRSO and Furtwangler in many guises. But I have so many others and continue to collect and explore. Just recently Brahmsian Colors put me onto the Furtwangler B4 from 1949 and it is an all around winner (Wow! Withering!) in pretty good sound. I also ordered the new Claves cycle because it was being hotly debated on this thread. Recently, I picked up used copies of the Haitink/Boston SO cycle that flew under the radar. And of course, our listening preferences change as we grow older and listen more. Careful listening is an art form, IMO. And there’s always this: listen to what you like and enjoy. I still love reading criticism and trying new things, though. Best wishes!


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Gray Bean said:


> Just recently Brahmsian Colors put me onto the Furtwangler B4 from 1949


I think you have confused me with another TC member whose user ID includes the name of Brahms.


----------



## Merl

Brahmsian Colors said:


> I think you have confused me with another TC member whose user ID includes the name of Brahms.


Or are you in fact the same person? I feel a conspiracy theory coming on. :lol:


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Merl said:


> Or are you in fact the same person? I feel a conspiracy theory coming on. :lol:


Now, now, I'm not really one of these::devil:


----------



## vincula

Here's one of my favourite cycle with Brahms:






Eduard Van Beinum and the Royal Concertgebouw. Don't listen to what you read on the internet. Listen to the recording  It's absolutely first-class and should be better known.

A different but equally engaging is Herbert Kegel/Leipzig RSO. So underrated in Europe.











Normally played "live" on air with no studio tricks and multiple takes, direct to the radio tapes and out to the world... along (beyond?) the WALL.

Regards,

Vincula


----------



## Knorf

Do people bash on Van Beinum's Brahms? I always thought they were really good!


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Knorf said:


> Do people bash on Van Beinum's Brahms? I always thought they were really good!


Nobody that I know. One of my prized sets along with Furt, Weingartner, Toscanini, Abbado, Kempe, Jochum, Klemperer, and Walter.


----------



## Knorf

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Nobody that I know. One of my prized sets along with Furt, Weingartner, Toscanini, Abbado, Kempe, Jochum, Klemperer, and Walter.


Ok, if you must have Furtwängler and Toscanini, could I persuade you to include Dorati and Kertesz? Otherwise I like that list for more or less old-school Brahms. And of course mine would include Karajan.

ETA: do you not like Szell for Brahms? (I do.)

EATA: and I rate Skrowaczewski for Brahms very highly, especially No. 4.

AEATA: Oh, and Wand. You like Wand, right?


----------



## Merl

Knorf said:


> Do people bash on Van Beinum's Brahms? I always thought they were really good!


Ive never read a poor review either. Most people really rate his Brahms (me included).


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Knorf said:


> Ok, if you must have Furtwängler and Toscanini, could I persuade you to include Dorati and Kertesz? Otherwise I like that list for more or less old-school Brahms. And of course mine would include Karajan.
> 
> ETA: do you not like Szell for Brahms? (I do.)
> 
> EATA: and I rate Skrowaczewski for Brahms very highly, especially No. 4.
> 
> AEATA: Oh, and Wand. You like Wand, right?


Wand is okay but has never wowed me. I sold off whatever Szell Brahms symphonies I had. Not warm enough for me. I need to hear Skrow. Can't remember when or if I sampled them.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

vincula said:


> Here's one of my favourite cycle with Brahms:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Eduard Van Beinum and the Royal Concertgebouw. Don't listen to what you read on the internet. Listen to the recording  It's absolutely first-class and should be better known.


I still recall Van Beinum's untimely death following the completion of his Brahms cycle in the late 1950s, and have held onto and admired these interpretations with the Concertgebouw for some 60 years. The First and Fourth were recorded in stereo, the Second and Third in mono. Though very good in my estimation, VB's Third doesn't quite match the degree of satisfaction I derive from his readings of the other three. Notwithstanding, I would place Van Beinum's interpretations of 1, 2 and 4 on a par with virtually anyone else's I have ever heard.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

^
Haha the 3rd is actually my favorite. Now we know who the fake Brahmsian is.


----------



## Simplicissimus

Knorf said:


> Ok, if you must have Furtwängler and Toscanini, could I persuade you to include Dorati and Kertesz? Otherwise I like that list for more or less old-school Brahms. And of course mine would include Karajan.
> 
> ETA: do you not like Szell for Brahms? (I do.)
> 
> EATA: and I rate Skrowaczewski for Brahms very highly, especially No. 4.
> 
> AEATA: Oh, and Wand. You like Wand, right?


It looks like Stan has recorded No. 4 with three different orchestras: Hallé, Yomiuri, and Saarbrücken. Any opinions about which ones are good? I'm very interested in checking out Stan's Brahms.


----------



## Merl

Simplicissimus said:


> It looks like Stan has recorded No. 4 with three different orchestras: Hallé, Yomiuri, and Saarbrücken. Any opinions about which ones are good? I'm very interested in checking out Stan's Brahms.


All of them are very good but the Saarbrucken is by far the best then Yomiuri then Halle.


----------



## Knorf

I only know the Saarbrücken recording, but I do love it.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Brahmsianhorn said:


> ^
> Haha the 3rd is actually my favorite. Now we know who the fake Brahmsian is.


Is the Third your favorite Brahms Symphony among the four?...or do you favor Van Beinum's interpretation of the Third Symphony over his interpretations of Brahms' First, Second and Fourth? I attempted to indicate I derived greater satisfaction from VB's interpretations of 1, 2 and 4 in comparison with his interpretation of Brahms' #3. Conductors aside, the composer's Third Symphony *is* my favorite among all four of his symphonies. Now that I look back to my previous post, perhaps I was at fault for failing to clarify this. I will do so.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

I thought you meant EvB’s 3rd.

But it is my favorite Brahms symphony as well.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Brahmsianhorn said:


> I thought you meant EvB's 3rd.
> 
> But it is my favorite Brahms symphony as well.


That's fine. We both had it right the first time.


----------



## Animal the Drummer

Van Beinum was a marvellous all-round Brahmsian. I love his handling of the orchestral part in the Violin Concerto with Grumiaux and the Piano Concerto no.1 with Curzon.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Merl said:


> There are two Walter sets and most people prefer the first mono one with the NYPO, from the early 50s...It is a generally quicker cycle with better playing and although the sound is mono it's good mono....The stereo Columbia cycle from the early 60s [which] some don't rate as highly still has its suitors of which I'm one. I actually play it more than the mono set. The sound is far superior to the 50s set, unsurprisingly. I much prefer the 3rd from this cycle, btw and its a quick one (but not as fast as the mono one) . The 4th is more languid but beautifully done. Its a lovely set and I would recommend it. Not everyone feels the same but hey.


I think you're right on the money, Merl, about the Columbia stereo set. I am partial to it as well. Walter's more relaxed approach allows lyrical passages to be expressed more freely and openly, indeed more beautifully as you say. It does seem to me those who prefer the mono set do so mainly because it is more energetically paced. Nonetheless, I sense the older and wiser Walter has more to say that is decidedly appealing. Simultaneously though, he still seems capable of demonstrating a sense of drama in various passages where it is called for. Listen to the underlying tension he builds in the first movement of the First Symphony while maintaining the forward momentum of the flowing musical line. Fortunate it has been to have had Bruno Walter's most capable and endearing qualities displayed for many to hear and enjoy.

Incidentally, speaking of the speedier pace of the mono set, I assume you're aware of the unbelievable lightening like streak at the closing of Walter's NY Philharmonic Brahms Second. It's even quicker than Jochum's exceptionally fast finale of _his_ Brahms 2 from the mono Berlin Philharmonic set.


----------



## DarkAngel

Check out this new remaster live 1941 B3,4 by Stoki, excellent sound from archival source disc of radio broadcast, please check long HD sound sample:

https://www.pristineclassical.com/products/pasc602

Very dramatic and colorful, fasten your seatbelts.........


----------



## Knorf

Merl, I have a soft spot for the Walter/Columbia Brahms cycle, too, and have had from my earliest acquaintance with it. Oddly enough, people often forget it qualifies for the "small band" Brahms, in the Meiningen Tradition, in that the recordings utilized a pretty small string section, and in general the winds are balanced very well.


----------



## Merl

Knorf said:


> Merl, I have a soft spot for the Walter/Columbia Brahms cycle, too, and have had from my earliest acquaintance with it. Oddly enough, people often forget it qualifies for the "small band" Brahms, in the Meiningen Tradition, in that the recordings utilized a pretty small string section, and in general the winds are balanced very well.


It's a lovely set. It certainly doesn't sound puny in any way does it?


----------



## Heck148

Brahmsian Colors said:


> ....Incidentally, speaking of the speedier pace of the mono set, I assume you're aware of the unbelievable lightening like streak at the closing of Walter's NY Philharmonic Brahms Second. It's even quicker than Jochum's exceptionally fast finale of _his_ Brahms 2 from the mono Berlin Philharmonic set.


Reiner really gets the coda of #2 going in his thrilling live NYPO version from 3/60...not quite as fast as Walter, but they're definitely zipping along....tremendous brass playing....audience went nuts, understandably....


----------



## Heck148

Merl said:


> It's a lovely set. It certainly doesn't sound puny in any way does it?


No, it doesn't...but Walter's is big band concept all the way...Columbia used a small string section for these recordings, iirc, it was for $$ reasons.


----------



## Knorf

Merl said:


> It's a lovely set. It certainly doesn't sound puny in any way does it?


Nope. But a small band shouldn't, necessarily. It's more an issue of clarity, rhythm, and balance. That's the appeal, in my opinion.



Heck148 said:


> No, it doesn't...but Walter's is big band concept all the way...Columbia used a small string section for these recordings, iirc, it was for $$ reasons.


"Big band concept"? No, he clearly made adjustments, and very effectively so. But yes, it was prompted by budget issues. All of Walter's Columbia recordings are a relatively small string section, including for Mahler.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

What I love most about Bruno Walter is his _humility_. It's evident from his rehearsal samples that he was an all-around great human being who treated his players with dignity and respect. And this is evident in those late stereo recordings, where everything just radiates such an irresistable warmth and obvious joy at the privilege of getting to make music. It puts a smile on my face every time, even in the ones where I think he whiffs interpretively (like his Columbia Mahler 1 and 2 and Brahms 4; even though the drama's missing, the heart is still there). He usually follows the score very closely (like in Brahms 3 - Poco Allegretto! Poco Allegretto! _Poco Allegretto!!!!!_ Yes, someone actually does it!!!) but there's still many unmistakable personal touches. However, even more than in Brahms, I revere Walter in Mozart - absolutely sublime.


----------



## Knorf

I've long argued (elsewhere) that Walter's greatness in Mozart is part of what makes his Brahms so special.


----------



## Merl

Allegro Con Brio said:


> ..... . It puts a smile on my face every time, even in the ones where I think he whiffs interpretively (like his Columbia Mahler 1 and 2 and Brahms 4; even though the drama's missing, the heart is still there).


I love his Columbia Mahler 1&2, ACB. You're the first person I've ever known to not rate them. That Mahler 1st was my reference account for years and remains firmly in my top 10.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Merl said:


> I love his Columbia Mahler 1&2, ACB. You're the first person I've ever known to not rate them. That Mahler 1st was my reference account for years and remains firmly in my top 10.


I think the conducting is perfect, but they just lack a bit of Mahlerian angst and spontaneity. I much prefer Walter's mono NY Mahler 1, which is blazing hot and just sounds so _right._ I don't quite get, for example, the same sensation of a bunch of drunk Viennese stumbling around a pub in the second movement from the stereo recording. But minor complaints, I guess.


----------



## vincula

Knorf said:


> I've long argued (elsewhere) that Walter's greatness in Mozart is part of what makes his Brahms so special.


I totally agree with this view.

Got actually two sets of complete Brahms cycle with Walter/Colombia on vinyl. The one at the beach house gets whirled quite often. Will give it as a gift to someone who can appreciate it. Haven't found anyone yet. Most of my acquaintances dismiss "that old hat crap". Thank God I found this forum :lol:

Regards,

Vincula


----------



## Gray Bean

And nobody does the 3rd like Walter.


----------



## Heck148

Merl said:


> I love his Columbia Mahler 1&2, ACB. You're the first person I've ever known to not rate them. That Mahler 1st was my reference account for years and remains firmly in my top 10.


Walter's Mahler #2 was with NYPO, not the ColSO....I know there was some mislabelling on some of the reissues....same with DLvDE with Miller, Haefliger - it's with NYPO..#s 1 and 9 were with ColSO [aka LAPO + some Hollywood studio personnel]


----------



## Heck148

Knorf said:


> "Big band concept"? No, he clearly made adjustments, and very effectively so. But yes, it was prompted by budget issues. All of Walter's Columbia recordings are a relatively small string section, including for Mahler.


I think Walter definitely thought "big" for Brahms - he wanted sound - he certainly did for his NYPO set.....I know it's just one comparison: tho they both use smaller orchestras, I find little in common between Walter/ColSO and Zehetmair and his group...I think that Walter did not want to make it sound like a "small" orchestra....Zehetmair does....it's a different concept.
Also - among other things, Walter would never allow the clipped phrase endings...


----------



## Knorf

Heck148 said:


> I think Walter definitely thought "big" for Brahms - he wanted sound - he certainly did for his NYPO set.....I know it's just one comparison: tho they both use smaller orchestras, I find little in common between Walter/ColSO and Zehetmair and his group...I think that Walter did not want to make it sound like a "small" orchestra....Zehetmair does....it's a different concept.
> Also - among other things, Walter would never allow the clipped phrase endings...


There is literally not a single sentence here that accurately corresponds with my own recent listening, other than that both used smaller orchestras.

My criticism of Zehetmair is mild, and mainly that he comes across to me as a bit mannered in the flow of tempi, and choices of rubato. Deliberately trying to sound "small"? Inappropriately clipping phrase endings*? No. Those things are not happening. It's bizarre to me to hear those claims, sufficiently so to make me wonder whether we're talking about the same recordings at all.

I'm not saying Zehetmair's and Walter's orchestral sound worlds are the same, but to say Zehetmair is small and Walter big does neither justice.

*I assume we can agree that not every phrase should end with a soft taper, especially not those marked with staccato dots. Anyway, Walter observes a variety of marked phrase endings as well.


----------



## Heck148

Knorf said:


> My criticism of Zehetmair is mild, and mainly that he comes across to me as a bit mannered in the flow of tempi, and choices of rubato.


Yes, I can see that, but that isn't too big a problem for me....in the opening of #4/IV - there was some definite clipping of phrases in the beginning section - it almost needed a re-start every 8 bars....also - in Sym #2/I - a very odd thing - the opening theme - the main tune - the woodinds play the half-note, then a short/clipped quarter note, separating it from the next measure...the horns don't play it that way, they play the quarter note full, which connects to the next measure...why would he have one section play it short/clipped, and the other section play it full/connected?? puzzling....



> Deliberately trying to sound "small"?


I don't hear the full woodwind choir sound with Zehetmair - that full organ like sound, which to me, is so essential in Brahms...you certainly hear it with Walter's recordings both NYPO [for sure!!] and ColSO...also - Walter's low brass were LAPO guys, a powerful section...they can really let loose with the volume....they would totally drown out Zehetmair's band....now Zehetmair is probably holding his trombones down in volume, given the orchestra size....I don't think Walter is holding anyone back!! 



> Inappropriately clipping phrase endings*? No. Those things are not happening.


Yes, they are, give a listen to those exceprts I mentioned - tho, it is very possible that we are listening to different recordings...I got mine off YouTube, not played back over my main sound system....I don't know if they were commercial releases or live performances. [??] no video.



> sufficiently so to make me wonder whether we're talking about the same recordings at all.


very possible, might be different versions!!



> I'm not saying Zehetmair's and Walter's orchestral sound worlds are the same, but to say Zehetmair is small and Walter big does neither justice.


Right, it's not that simple, which I think I mentioned in a previous posting.....different concept of how they want it to sound...


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Gray Bean said:


> And nobody does the 3rd like Walter.


If you haven't already done so, you might want to try listening to Kempe/Berlin Philharmonic, and see what you think.


----------



## Gray Bean

Brahmsian Colors said:


> If you haven't already done so, you might want to try listening to Kempe/Berlin Philharmonic, and see what you think.


Oh, I will? I don't know it. Is it a cycle? Sorry I got you confused with Brahmsianhorn!


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Gray Bean said:


> Oh, I will? I don't know it. Is it a cycle? Sorry I got you confused with Brahmsianhorn!


I enthusiastically second the Kempe!


----------



## Gray Bean

Brahmsianhorn said:


> I enthusiastically second the Kempe!


I will begin my search for it!


----------



## Gray Bean

Testament...also found a single with the 4th Royal PO


----------



## Enthusiast

Knorf said:


> My criticism of Zehetmair is mild, and mainly that he comes across to me as a bit mannered in the flow of tempi, and choices of rubato. Deliberately trying to sound "small"? Inappropriately clipping phrase endings*? No. Those things are not happening. It's bizarre to me to hear those claims, sufficiently so to make me wonder whether we're talking about the same recordings at all.


I had seen you saying that you found Zehetmair's Brahms a bit mannered and had wondered what you meant so I'm glad to see this clarification. Now I know what you mean but I'm not sure I would call that mannered (not that you can't!). It could also be described as "inspired"? It is about his shaping of the music's trajectory and seems to help to give the performances life and energy as well as allowing him moments of delicacy or repose. You find it disrupting the flow - and fair enough (speed changes can often do that) - but I find it rather involving.


----------



## Knorf

Enthusiast said:


> I had seen you saying that you found Zehetmair's Brahms a bit mannered and had wondered what you meant so I'm glad to see this clarification. Now I know what you mean but I'm not sure I would call that mannered (not that you can't!). It could also be described as "inspired"? It is about his shaping of the music's trajectory and seems to help to give the performances life and energy as well as allowing him moments of delicacy or repose. You find it disrupting the flow - and fair enough (speed changes can often do that) - but I find it rather involving.


I absolutely concede that "a bit mannered" to me could be "inspired" to you. And I really don't want to come across too negatively, because I did on the whole really like the Zehetmair Brahms that I heard. Your description does make sense to me and will probably effect how I listen to these recordings the next time.



Heck148 said:


> Yes, I can see that, but that isn't too big a problem for me....in the opening of #4/IV - there was some definite clipping of phrases in the beginning section - it almost needed a re-start every 8 bars....


Okay, here I think we're hearing the same thing, and this is what I've been calling "a bit mannered." But Zehetmair is not doing it that much and certainly not all the time; it's balanced with greater continuity in other places, especially later, which creates a dramatic shape based on phrase articulation (hesitation becomes determination), and in any case this is certainly _not_ an invalid approach that "Walter would never have allowed," as if it were the equivalent to skipping a class and spending lunch money on a nudie magazine.

Thank Cthulhu Bruno Walter never thought every single phrase should have a plush, soft finish, although I seem to recall your castigating Karajan for supposedly doing this (which he doesn't, actually.)



> also - in Sym #2/I - a very odd thing - the opening theme - the main tune - the woodinds play the half-note, then a short/clipped quarter note, separating it from the next measure...the horns don't play it that way, they play the quarter note full, which connects to the next measure...why would he have one section play it short/clipped, and the other section play it full/connected?? puzzling....


Ok, what I heard: some of the quarter notes that follow half notes are indeed slightly shorter than others, played with a small amount of separation instead of legato, but the instruments (horns included) always do it together the same in the same bar. I don't know why Zehetmair asked for it this way, but it's consistent top to bottom of the score when they do it, and doesn't bother me very much.

It does comes across to me admittedly as slightly affected-what I called "mannered"-but hardly enough so to condemn the whole. And you'll notice the second thematic group is treated very legato across all phrases, with a fabulous singing quality, so it seems this articulation is something Zehetmair wanted to do at least in part to distinguish the thematic groups. Hesitation in the first, flowing in the second. And it's a perfectly valid, musical interpretation.



> I don't hear the full woodwind choir sound with Zehetmair - that full organ like sound, which to me, is so essential in Brahms...


Now this makes zero sense to me at all. The Zehetmair woodwinds are gorgeous, blended, more consistently and resonantly in tune than average, and they play a full dynamic range, with quite scrupulous adherence to the markings. One thing I especially like, something Solti never seemed to understand at any time when he stood in front of the CSO, is that not every forte is the same. Also, because of the slightly smaller string section I can always hear the woodwinds, which is definitely not always true in all recordings. And the brass are very lovely, very rich and never overbearing, except at the end of Symphony 2 when they're meant to be.



> Walter's low brass were LAPO guys, a powerful section...they can really let loose with the volume....they would totally drown out Zehetmair's band....now Zehetmair is probably holding his trombones down in volume, given the orchestra size....I don't think Walter is holding anyone back!!


This is just silly. These are _recordings_, one of which you're listening to streaming compressed over YouTube, not in an official release and not the actual CDs! Therefore there's no good basis for direct comparison of loudness, except in terms of relative balance only.

But I now perceive the bottom line: should I be surprised a Reiner and Solti fan thinks the brass should always be overbalanced, and rarely if ever match dynamics to the rest of the orchestra? (This is a big reason why many Solti recordings are unlistenable for me. The CSO brass had the worst self-indulgent habits during his tenure.)

Anyway, on that point I am starting to think we will never agree. But in any case, what really baffles me is you seem to refuse to notice the relative balances between _Walter_ and Zehetmair in terms of the brass, woodwinds, and rest of the orchestra are more similar than not. Brass forte matches the rest of the orchestra forte, which frankly I find more musical and more likely accurate as to Brahms's intention.

I mean, if you don't like that, it's something you can be specific about. You don't think the brass should balance the orchestra, whether or not they have primary thematic material, just like the CSO during the Solti era.

(Incidentally, if you want an constantly overheated brass section in Brahms 2, have you heard Mravinsky/Leningrad? Although I actually kind of like that recording. Better than Solti, anyway.)

But asking the brass to balance their forte to the rest of the orchestra's forte is _not wrong_, nor a sign of weakness, nor disrespectful to some authority. (I have a fun story along these lines involving a performance of the Stravinsky Octet, but maybe I'll save it for another day.)

I've now done a direct comparison of Brahms 2 to Brahms 2, Zehetmair v. Dausgaard, and I like Dausgaard slightly better.


----------



## Knorf

Okay, this is a _non sequitur_, but I'll tell my Stravinsky Octet story. This piece is much loved by bassoonists, because although it is very difficult, this Octet is basically a concerto grosso in which the two bassoons are the concertino to the rest of the ensemble's ripieno.

The instrumentation is odd, and apparently came to Stravinsky in a dream: one flute, one clarinet, two bassoons, two trumpets, and two trombones. Seeing as the two bassoons have the biggest solo parts, one might suspect that there can be some balance problems. Indeed: the brass must take care to not overpower the reset of the ensemble, especially when other parts have the primary melodic material.

One performance I gave of this piece was for a graduate conducting student's recital. This piece is a common choice for this, especially for aspiring wind band conductors. It was mostly a really good ensemble, of hired young professional players like myself at the time, and a few top students from the school of music. Among the brass, the two trumpets and first trombone were students; the bass trombonist was a superb professional player who was and is a friend of mine. (In fact, I introduced him to his wife!)

The conductor was constantly asking the brass to play softer, which they _hated_. I recall one specific place where the flute and clarinet clearly had the primary material.

Conductor: "Guys! The flute and clarinet have the lead. You need to balance to them!"

Hotshot young trumpet player: "But it feels like we're having to play piano all the time!"

Conductor: "I understand, but you don't have the main melody; the woodwinds do!"

First hotshot young trumpet player: "Ugh."

Other hotshot young trumpet player: "It's just so frustrating!"

Conductor: "In any case, your forte can't exceed theirs."

Then the professional bass trombone player speaks up: "Guys! It's called music! Ever heard of it?!"

Silence.

There was no further dissent regarding balance.

If that trombone player hadn't been my friend already, that would have made him one!


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Gray Bean said:


> Oh, I will? I don't know it. Is it a cycle? Sorry I got you confused with Brahmsianhorn!


The Kempe Brahms Third with the Berlin Philharmonic is not available individually on cd, though if you listen to lps, it can still be found in that format on the Quintessence label in very good sound. Otherwise, to get it on cd, you would have to purchase the complete Kempe/Berlin set of all four Brahms Symphonies on the Testament label. I will mention though that while Symphonies 1 and 3 are in stereo, 2 and 4 are in mono. Personally, I have mixed feelings about his interpretations of 1,2 and 4, though on balance I view them positively.....Incidentally, though you'll have to search for them, Kempe's First (on the British Classics For Pleasure label), Second (Quintessence mono) and Fourth are also on lp. That Fourth (in stereo) was recorded in 1976 with the Royal Philharmonic, just three months before his death.

Kempe also re-recorded the Four Brahms Symphonies in 1974 with the Munich Philharmonic. The set can be purchased on cd (Scribendum label), but each of the symphonies can also still be found in the lp format individually on BASF (Search eBay and Discogs). Frankly, I prefer Kempe's Berlin Third (I own the Quintessence lp--see photo} to his Munich Third, both interpretively and soundwise.

Happy hunting!


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Kempe's superlative Brahms 3 is also available on this:


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Kempe's superlative Brahms 3 is also available on this:
> 
> View attachment 138673


Good! I hadn't seen this set. Thanks ACB :tiphat:


----------



## Gray Bean

I ordered the Kempe/Berlin cycle on Testament as well as the 4th with the Royal Philharmonic (also on Testament). Thanks for putting me onto him.


----------



## Animal the Drummer

That RPO performance is a particularly lovely one IMHO. It helped me to start getting into the piece properly, after I'd previously found it a tough nut to crack.


----------



## Heck148

Knorf said:


> Okay, here I think we're hearing the same thing, and this is what I've been calling "a bit mannered." But Zehetmair is not doing it that much and certainly not all the time; it's balanced with greater continuity in other places, especially later,


Whatever - I simply observed that those clipped phrases were, to me, distracting....I guess Zehetmair had his reasons for doing it that way, which is fine, but I found it unconvincing, halting, stilted - I prefer the seamless flow, the supple flexibility that Toscanini achieved....that's my preference...
As far as the phrasing inconsistency in Sym #2/I - I found it odd is all - maybe he wanted it that way [??] - to have different sections phrase it differently, or maybe it was one of those live performance mishaps that just happened spur of the moment[??] I just thought it worth pointing out what appears to be an inconsistency.....now, I was listening to YouTube renditions, not played back on the main sound system...and we may well be citing different recorded sources for our observations, which makes the whole thing a bit pointless!!


> Bruno Walter never thought every single phrase should have a plush, soft finish, although I seem to recall your castigating Karajan for supposedly doing this (which he doesn't, actually.)


Where is that coming from?? Walter liked a big bold woodwind and brass sonority, [so did Klemperer]



> The Zehetmair woodwinds are gorgeous, blended, more consistently and resonantly in tune than average....


, 
They're ok, I just don't care for that small-sounding, rather bland approach....that's my preference....same with the brass - to my ears, for Brahms, it is underplayed, almost, but not quite, "wimpy"...I like big-sounding Brahms...I love the sound of a full woodwind choir. the big, powerful sound of Brahms' wonderful trombone choir parts is thrilling. Having played professionally in orchestras for over 50 years, that's how I like it.
Anyway - I don't know exactly what Brahms intended, nobody does...I go by what sounds the best to me....



> Solti never seemed to understand at any time when he stood in front of the CSO, is that not every forte is the same.


There is a fable that circulates that Solti played everything loud...this is just b*llsh*t, it is totally wrong....I'm not referring to recordings, I'm talking about live concerts, of which I heard many by Solti/CSO....the dynamic range was truly stunning - widest dynamic range I've ever heard at live programs....the clarity was amazing - and one thing which was esp noteworthy - the woodwind soloists always came thru with remarkable clarity - accompaniments were soft enough that the soloists had a large dynamic range to explore, and different tone colors could be used as well - they weren't always "pushing" - playing at the top of the dynamic range. Could the orchestra get loud?? Oh, for sure, deafening, when called forth - Solti had a great instrument to work with, and he took full advantage...
That huge dynamic range was a heritage from Reiner, who thrived on it....even more than Solti....under Reiner, some of the _subito pianissimos_, or _fortissimos_ are breathtaking...incredible orchestra control and execution....
for me, the brass is not over-bearing or too dominant - anymore than Mravinky's LeningradPO was...they are there in abundance, when needed, when called upon....for me, it works, that's my preference. I love a huge dynamic range at an orchestra concert....
playing for conductors who demand it is the most challenging, also - as you know - orchestras are lazy - they will all too willingly fall into the "mezza-mezzo routine", in which nothing is ever really soft, and nothing is ever really loud - it all decays into this mid-dynamic _mp-mf-f_ range....the great conductors won't allow it, they demand extremes.


----------



## Knorf

Heck148, my friend whom I respect, could I ask you for a favor? I'd like to invite, for your consideration, attention to the fact that using an ellipsis, i.e. "...." to replace "," or ";" or " -" or even "." is a significant impediment to readability and quality of written expression. Thanks in advance.

I very much like some big-band Brahms, too, just not to the degree that I automatically reject alternatives.

Nor do I expect modern performers to always adhere to the standards of the past. On the contrary, I think it is _absolutely essential_ to be open-within reason-to the creation of new standards of interpretation. Without the possibility of an imaginative realization of _new_ standards in established repertoire, you may as well drive the last few nails into the coffin. Classical music will become not even a dusty museum, but rather a mausoleum.


----------



## Heck148

Knorf said:


> Heck148, my friend whom I respect, could I ask you for a favor? I'd like to invite, for your consideration, attention to the fact that using an ellipsis, i.e. "...." to replace "," or ";" or " -" or even "." is a significant impediment to readability and quality of written expression. Thanks in advance.


?? I'm not sure what you mean...punctuation??



> I very much like some big-band Brahms, too, just not to the degree that I automatically reject alternatives.


Sure, I didn't automatically reject Zehetmair's efforts....there is some very lovely music-making going on there. l was just pointing out some things that I noticed. I guess I'm not too sold on small orchestra Brahms at this point, but I'm interested to hear other efforts...also, not all big-band Brahms works, either. Brahms scored pretty thickly at times, but there is remarkable clarity if done right.


----------



## 89Koechel

Knorf - " ... new standards of interpretation." - THAT is certainly true, and not only (as a side-effect) to those who would CLOSE their minds to newer conductors, in TOTAL favor of the older ones. In other words, when the recordings of Weingartner, Toscanini and others appeared, were they accepted as BETTER than any others, beforehand? Well, we probably don't know, since there are so few recordings of Brahms before the "old man" and the Viennese straight-arrow, but it's also sure that Toscanini, van Beinum, WF/Furtwangler, et. al. don't have to be the "last word" in our considerations of the Brahms' 4. Maybe in a way, Brahms was fortunate to produce "only" four Symphonies, so that it's easier for us (in retrospects) to focus on ONLY four, instead of the Beethoven 9, Bruckner 9, Mahler 9, etc. I don't think even the Schumann Four enjoy such a plethora of recent recordings, to sift-through. ... Finally, I like your photo (with your posts); is it representative of yourself, or a musical friend? ... Just wondered.


----------



## 89Koechel

Brahmsianhorn - (Szell) - OK, the usual criticism of Szell, as being "cold" ... or as you say "not warm enough for me". Fair enough, but Papa George had a certain BENT on discipline, but NOT at the expense of a certain encompassing (whether "warm" or not) embrace of what he recorded in the Symphonies of MANY. I'm sure you'd not want that Szell would be self-indulgent, or overly-subjective, even in Brahms - am I mistaken? ... I still think his, overall, recordings of the Beethoven 9, Brahms 4 & Schumann 4 are some of the most-consistently ENDURING of all, with few (if any flaws) in playing and/or conducting ... all the way through. Well, each of us have our own choices, eh? ... and no wonder.


----------



## Knorf

Heck148 said:


> ?? I'm not sure what you mean...punctuation??


Hahaha, ok, I won't mention it again. 



> Sure, I didn't automatically reject Zehetmair's efforts....there is some very lovely music-making going on there. l was just pointing out some things that I noticed.


Fair enough. Sometimes, we're just at a moment of _de gustibus non est disputandum_.

I wonder whether you'd like the Dausgaard/Swedish Chamber Orchestra performances better, as I do.



> ...also, not all big-band Brahms works, either.


That's for sure! It can get too bloated and glurgy.



> Brahms scored pretty thickly at times, but there is remarkable clarity if done right.


Paradoxical, but I rather agree.

Did you happen to know Ron Klimko? He was the only bassoonist I ever knew who hated Brahms. (How can anyone hate Brahms?  But he did.) I tried to persuade him to reconsider, to no avail. Brahms's thick counterpoint was a permanent stumbling point. To me, it's a feature, not a liability! Not to Ron.



89Koechel said:


> Finally, I like your photo (with your posts); is it representative of yourself, or a musical friend? ... Just wondered.


Thanks, and I wish he had been a friend! My avatar is Pierre Boulez, who had to wear sunglasses when in the studio filming a conducting program, for a brief period, because he had contracted shingles and the bright studio lights hurt his eyes. I just think he looked really cool, conducting Stravinsky, etc., in sunglasses! And I'm definitely a huge Boulez fan, of his conducting as well as his composing and writing.


----------



## Heck148

Knorf said:


> I wonder whether you'd like the Dausgaard/Swedish Chamber Orchestra performances better, as I do.


I'll check it out!! The only SwedishCO I have is some Haydn(B. Drahos)...Sym #51 - with insanely stratospheric horn part!!


> That's for sure! It can get too bloated and glurgy....Paradoxical, but I rather agree.


Boris Goldovsky, the opera guru, was as very fine conductor, studied with Reiner, Koussevitsky, assistant to Rodzinski...he abhorred the stodgy, rigid, time-beater style - "Kapellmeister stuff" he called it. He taught that the conductor's job was to go into the score, find all of those touches of genius contained therein...little details, a trill, a dissonance, a little counter-melody, and bring those out..what needed to be heard, what did NOT need to be heard - sustained notes, chord tones, etc. Brahms provides an essential challenge in this regard. There is so much in the score, the conductor has to sort thru it and make it clear...if not, the music does indeed become thick, bloated and "glurgy" (lol!! 
wonderfully descriptive word!!)


> Did you happen to know Ron Klimko? He was the only bassoonist I ever knew who hated Brahms. (How can anyone hate Brahms?  But he did.) I tried to persuade him to reconsider, to no avail. Brahms's thick counterpoint was a permanent stumbling point. To me, it's a feature, not a liability! Not to Ron.


I never met him in person, but we exchanged some correspondence back awhile ago...didn't he put together some big surveys on Bassoon Performance and Teaching??
How could he not like the exquisite clarinet/bassoon parts in Brahms #3/I &II, or #4/II - it's so crystal clear!!


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

89Koechel said:


> Brahmsianhorn - (Szell) - OK, the usual criticism of Szell, as being "cold" ... or as you say "not warm enough for me". Fair enough, but Papa George had a certain BENT on discipline, but NOT at the expense of a certain encompassing (whether "warm" or not) embrace of what he recorded in the Symphonies of MANY. I'm sure you'd not want that Szell would be self-indulgent, or overly-subjective, even in Brahms - am I mistaken? ... I still think his, overall, recordings of the Beethoven 9, Brahms 4 & Schumann 4 are some of the most-consistently ENDURING of all, with few (if any flaws) in playing and/or conducting ... all the way through. Well, each of us have our own choices, eh? ... and no wonder.


Szell was very precise, yes. There is so much more to Brahms than that.


----------



## 89Koechel

Knorf - (avatar) - I should've known, it was Boulez. More and more, I've started to wonder about his old recordings and interpretations. As fine as his baton was, was he really the BEST in Ravel or Debussy, or even his traversal of "The Rite of Spring"? For a NON-stodgy reason, I still like the (even) older-timer - Monteux - in the latter, from 1929, due to the extraordinary SWEEP that Monteux imparts, in the last parts of "The Rite". Anyhoo, Monteux had a very-few fine interpretations of Brahms, himself ... as did Reiner, and, of course, Szell (and Brahmsianhorn has his objections to the Cleveland O. meister). Thanks!


----------



## 89Koechel

Brahmsianhorn: (Szell, in Brahms) - Well, the "precise" type of argument could carry-over, to Szell in the Beethoven Symphonies, or elsewhere. Maybe you'd prefer that Szell could've RELAXED his discipline, just a bit, to linger-over certain sections of the Brahms' Symphonies. Is that part of your argument, and what, much more, would you REQUIRE from Szell? I don't think rubatos (where not necessary) nor a "caressing" type of treatment would be IN-CHARACTER, from Szell ... not that you were asking for THOSE. I see your argument, but if one wants a more-yielding type of Brahms interpretation, it's sure that we should look elsewhere. Thanks!


----------



## Becca

Time to resurrect an old thread...

With some exceptions, Brahms has never been a significant part of my listening and when I do, the symphonies aren't often what I reach for. Having said that, I have recently come across half of a (hopefully yet to be completed) symphony cycle by Herbert Blomstedt and the Leipzig Gewandhaus that really impressed me. These are very recent (2020) therefore a 92y/o Blomstedt but they sound like the work of someone half a century younger (at least) - highly recommended.

P.S. It is worth noting that the Klemperer set has always been my 'go to' recordings.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Becca said:


> Time to resurrect an old thread...
> 
> With some exceptions, Brahms has never been a significant part of my listening and when I do, the symphonies aren't often what I reach for. Having said that, I have recently come across half of a (hopefully yet to be completed) symphony cycle by Herbert Blomstedt and the Leipzig Gewandhaus that really impressed me. These are very recent (2020) therefore a 92y/o Blomstedt but they sound like the work of someone half a century younger (at least) - highly recommended.
> 
> P.S. It is worth noting that the Klemperer set has always been my 'go to' recordings.


I am only seeing the Dresden set for Blomstedt complete Brahms symphonies. Unless maybe the Leipzig recordings are not offered in a complete set.

I only have karajan and Rahbari and so far have not taken to well to Brahms' symphonies.


----------



## Becca

Becca said:


> half of a (*hopefully yet to be completed*) symphony cycle


Only the 1st and 2nd have been released so far. Given the pandemic and that these are from live performances, the other two may not yet have been recorded.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Becca said:


> Only the 1st and 2nd have been released so far. Given the pandemic and that these are from live performances, the other two may not yet have been recorded.


Ah yes. If I could read I would have known that. Thanks.


----------



## Merl

I only heard the 2nd a few weeks back and it's a really fine account. I've not heard the 1st yet but it received some mixed reviews (one said it was "gorgeous", another "dull"). I'll make my own mind up when I hear it but I'd happily recommend that 2nd. If he lives long enough I'm sure Herb will complete the cycle lol.


----------



## wkasimer

SixFootScowl said:


> I am only seeing the Dresden set for Blomstedt complete Brahms symphonies. Unless maybe the Leipzig recordings are not offered in a complete set.


Would you please point me to Blomstedt's Brahms with the Dresden Staatskapelle? I can't seem to find it anywhere.


----------



## wkasimer

Becca said:


> P.S. It is worth noting that the Klemperer set has always been my 'go to' recordings.


Same here. When the time comes to severely limit my collection, I'll keep Klemperer and one of the Levine recordings.


----------



## starthrower

I like my Solti CSO set. And I also have Sanderling, Sawallisch, and Bernstein DG. I know, the Bernstein is inconsistent but there are some wonderful movements too.


----------



## SixFootScowl

wkasimer said:


> Would you please point me to Blomstedt's Brahms with the Dresden Staatskapelle? I can't seem to find it anywhere.


So sorry. I think I need a vacation. No help that Amazon search feature totally sucks. I searched for Brahms complete symphonies and it is giving me Beethoven listings and thanks to modern CD covers that break the composer name into three lines and in my hurry, I did not notice. Actually, I don't know if there is any complete Brahms symphonies set with Blomstedt.


----------



## Knorf

The possibility of a complete Blomstedt/Brahms cycle with the Gewandhausorchester Leipzig certainly caught my attention. Nos. 1 & 2 are on Pentatone, but there is also a Decca download for of a 2008 No. 3:
https://www.amazon.com/Brahms-Symphony-No-3-Haydn-Variations/dp/B0029D3BDO

And an apparently "not currently available" Decca physical CD for No. 4 (selling used from $60 upwards):
https://www.amazon.com/Brahms-Symphony-Choruses-Cappella-SHM-CD/dp/B07W6CDJGS

Hopefully someone puts these in a box together.

ETA: Oh, I see that Decca disc is old, from 1998. Well, I'd take it for the sake of a compelte Blomstedt Brahms cycle.


----------



## Shea82821

I was checking out Kurt Masur's cycle on Decca a while back. It's pretty good for what you get in the set - symphonies included - but I think I'll be sticking with the classic choice of Karajan. He always did it best. Version wise: 1964 or 1973.


----------



## SONDEK

CnC Bartok said:


> James Loughran, whose Halle set on Classics for Pleasure are imperfectly gorgeous.


+1 for Jimmy Loughran's Halle outings with Brahms. Their Brahms No. 1 might be my absolute favourite.


----------



## Merl

SONDEK said:


> +1 for Jimmy Loughran's Halle outings with Brahms. Their Brahms No. 1 might be my absolute favourite.


Ahh, Jimmy L and the Halle! My hometown orchestra (I also witnessed them with Jimmy L playing Brahms). Agreed, it's a fine set and the sometimes chaotic, idiosyncratic Halle definitely pulled it off in their warmly expressive Brahms cycle. I saw them do a quite tortured Brahms 3 back in the day at the Free Trade Hall. They murdered the 3rd movement by playing it so slowly that Loughran kept urging them to speed up and shaking his head. Was most amusing.


----------



## Kiki

Vladimir Jurowski's Brahms does not seem to have been mentioned frequently. It is transparent, articulated, musical and sensitive. Just don't expect gothic grandeur. it is perfect for people like me who is not taken by Brahms' emotional overflow.


----------



## Animal the Drummer

Merl said:


> Ahh, Jimmy L and the Halle! My hometown orchestra (I also witnessed them with Jimmy L playing Brahms). Agreed, it's a fine set and the sometimes chaotic, idiosyncratic Halle definitely pulled it off in their warmly expressive Brahms cycle. I saw them do a quite tortured Brahms 3 back in the day at the Free Trade Hall. They murdered the 3rd movement by playing it so slowly that Loughran kept urging them to speed up and shaking his head. Was most amusing.


Another fan of James Loughran's Beethoven and Brahms with the Halle here. In particular his Beethoven 7 and Brahms 2 are among my favourite versions.

As an aside, anyone who's also interested in football might be surprised to learn that his son is Angus Loughran a.k.a.Statto. Trufax.


----------



## geralmar

SONNET CLV said:


> When it comes to the Brahms symphonies, I find I have most often over the past half century turned to the William Steinberg/Pittsburgh Symphony set originally on black disc from Command Classics:
> 
> View attachment 43555
> 
> 
> This set is currently available on a number of CD reissues, I believe.


There is now an official reissue on DG.


----------

