# Beethoven: Symphony #5 in C minor, op. 67



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Beethoven's fifth is one of the most famous works in all of classical music. At the moment it is tied with several other works as the third most strongly recommended symphony on the Talk Classical community's favorite and most highly recommended works.

As usual for a work of this stature, Wikipedia has a nice article about it, including a little analysis that amounts to a nice listening guide. The best source for recording recommendations is probably Trout's blog post on this work:



> 1. C. Kleiber (cond.), Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra (1974)
> 2. Reiner (cond.), Chicago Symphony Orchestra (1959)
> 3. Immerseel (cond.), Anima Eterna Orchestra (2007)
> 4. Gardiner (cond.), Orchestre Révolutionnaire et Romantique (1994)
> ...


Anyway, as usual, the main questions are: *Do you like this work? Do you love it? Why? What do you like about it? Do you have any reservations about it?* This is one work that might be too popular for its own good among talkclassical participants. Do you feel it's overrated?

And of course, what are your favorite recordings?


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

This is a work that Furtwängler owned, IMO. The monumental 1954 has the best sound, but the 1947 has more drive, while the 1943 is well-proportioned.

Bernstein's vastly underrated '76 live Amnesty International version is the best stereo account, while Carlos Kleiber's vastly overrated version is memorable for its rhythmic incisiveness but fails IMO to fully convey the Dionysian power of this great work as do some others, particularly in the finale. I actually prefer his father's version.

1. Wilhelm Furtwängler (5/25/1947) (Tahra, Audite, Music & Arts)
2. Wilhelm Furtwängler (1943) (DG, Tahra, Music & Arts, Andromeda)
3. Wilhelm Furtwängler (5/23/1954) (Tahra, Audite, Music & Arts, Andromeda)
4. Eugen Jochum (1951) (Tahra)
5. Arturo Toscanini (1933) (Naxos, RCA, Music & Arts, Pearl)
6. Otto Klemperer (1957) (Testament BBC)
7. Leonard Bernstein (1976 Amnesty International Concert) (DG)
8. Erich Kleiber (1953) (Decca)
9. Carlos Kleiber (1974) (DG)
10. Carlo Maria Giulini (1982) (DG)

Others worthy of consideration:

Karl Böhm (1953) (DG)
Victor de Sabata (1950) (Tahra, Urania)
Artur Nikisch (Dutton, DG, Symposium)
Herbert von Karajan (1963) (DG)
Otto Klemperer (1955) (EMI, Naxos)
Pierre Monteux (Decca)
Evgeny Mravinsky (1972) (Erato, Elatus)
Franz Schalk (Dante Lys)
Andre Cluytens (EMI, Royal Classics)
Bruno Walter (1958) (Sony)
George Szell (1969) (Orfeo)
Leonard Bernstein (Sony)
Rafael Kubelik (DG)
Sir John Barbirolli (Dutton)
Serge Koussevitzky (EMI Great Conductors)


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

I'll venture to share a personal POV on this work. Years ago, when I was trying and failing to understand classical music, this (along with Mozart's 40th) was the first work I "got." I learned to hear the dum-dum-dum duuuuuuum motif running through it, and then I was gradually able to perceive more and more of the structure, including of course the master narrative. Again, along with Mozart's 40th, it was the first time I could see what the big deal was about a big deal. If I could hum (any time I try to sound musical, the nearest equivalent would be the moans of a wounded ungulate), I would practically be able to hum the entire thing. 

I think it should yield for historical significance to Beethoven's 3rd and for cultural importance to the 9th, but I'd recommend no other symphonies more strongly for its fame and approachability. And then - again this is of course somewhat personal - I'd put Mozart's 40th, Dvorak's 9th, and Brahms's 1st and 4th right behind it. All the other symphonies (sorry Mahler) would go a bit lower down.... 

Also, there are endless good recordings of this, but I see nothing wrong with beginning with the famous Kleiber.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Reiner/CSO
Toscanini/NBC
Szell/CO
Steiberg/PittsSO [on Command]

recently got the Sdlti/CSO complete set, excellent #5


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Yet another list, from the Amazon forum, which seems to reflect some of the thoughts expressed so far:

1 - Wilhelm Furtwangler, Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra 1954 - 



2 - Erich Kleiber, Concertgebouw Orchestra 1953 - http://tinyurl.com/j53y8no
3 - Fritz Reiner, Chicago Symphony Orchestra
4 - Bernard Haitink, London Symphony Orchestra 2006
5 - Leonard Bernstein, New York Philharmonic Orchestra
6 - Serge Koussevitzky, Boston Symphony Orchestra - 



7 - Eugen Jochum, London Symphony Orchestra
8 - Mikhail Pletnev, Russian National Orchestra - 



9 (tie) - John Eliot Gardiner, Orchestre Révolutionnaire et Romantique - 



9 (tie) - Carlos Kleiber, Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra - 




I'll put in a vote for Gardiner, whose ORR recording of the 5th's 1st movement, if you're in a receptive mood, is absolutely hair-raising.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

KenOC said:


> Yet another list, from the Amazon forum:
> 
> 1 - Wilhelm Furtwangler, Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra 1954 -
> 
> ...


Not sure why they recommend that VPO account for Furtwängler. His profound May 1954 BPO account is the one I recommend above (though not quite as good as the fleeter 1947 account).

The transition to the finale at 25:45 is phenomenal, the best ever achieved IMO:


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

This was the first symphony I heard live in concert. I don’t listen to it now, and don’t have it in my collection. 

Its hard to tell why, even being over familiar with it doesn’t provide a reason. Some warhorses have retained my interest and others haven’t. This is simply among those which haven’t.

I prefer Beethoven’s concertos and chamber music, since I find the symphonies a bit too overwhelming. That’s the best reason I can come up with. Having said that, I still enjoy Symphonies 3, 8 and 9.

I had a couple of recordings of No. 5 over the years: Vienna/Kleiber and most recently Berlin/Maazel.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

This is one of the two Beethoven symphonies that I deem "essential" for me - meaning that if I had to start my CD collection from scratch there's no way I'd leave them out (the 6th is the other one). Even after all these years, I love to listen to it. I have the 70s Karajan on DG, which suits me fine - in general, I don't care for multiple versions of the same work.


----------



## Guest (Jan 12, 2019)

None more recent than 2006, and a preponderance of recommendations for 40s and 50s interpretations. Is it really because Furtwangler (and others) "owned it"?

I like the Gardiner - decent pace, unlike the lugubrious Furtwangler.

Here's the "award winners" on Presto. https://www.prestomusic.com/classic...winner=true&size=10&view=large&sort=relevance

Why do I like it? Because its so self-important. Its "Come here! Now! Listen to me! Don't you understand??"


----------



## Judith (Nov 11, 2015)

Love it. Final movement is my favourite as it makes me emotional even though it's not supposed to


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

No question to my mind that the best all round version is VPO / C Kleiber but Karajan / BPO runs him close


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^^^ A great number of recommendations in the Presto list you linked to. I particularly welcome from it some that have not been named yet and are very close to my heart (and preferable to some of those named): 

Harnoncourt - both (very different) recordings: COE and Concentus Musicus
Gardiner's live recording (I think it is a lot better than the studio one)
Klemperer
Vanska

I would like to hear Jordan at some point.

And I would add the Peter Eotvos recording.

A great work, of course: one of the few warhorses that really is as good as its reputation (or even better).


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

MacLeod said:


> None more recent than 2006, and a preponderance of recommendations for 40s and 50s interpretations. Is it really because Furtwangler (and others) "owned it"?...


Yes. Exactly what I was thinking. Furtwangler didn't "own" it; he merely made great early recordings of it, which have since been equalled (some may say bettered). Such ludicrous levels of praise.

I still have this in my collection and listen to it now and again. Jochum on one of those DG 10" vinyls is the one I probably listen to most.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Of all of Beethoven's symphonies after the Eroica, the 5th is probably my least favourite (but it's still great) probably due to the weaker middle movements (don't shoot me). However there are some performances that stand out a mile......

*Honeck* (clear winner, stunning recording, fabulous playing, absolutely thrilling performance. Turn it up loud, make sure the neighbours are out and enjoy the ride of your life) 
*Markevitch* (powerful as hell) 
*Kleiber* (Carlos - classic recording)
*Gardiner* (live Carnegie - thrilling disc)

Loads of super ones after that including;
Szell
Solti (first cycle) 
Norrington (wnd Hannsler cycle) 
Gardiner (from cycle) 
Mackerras (SCO)
Gielen (2nd cycle) 
Immerseel
Karajan (live japan 77 cycle - you need to hear this 5th if you like Karajan) 
Jordan (French dvd cycle) 
Fischer (RCO)
Schuricht
Scherchen

I've probably forgotten loads (they were off the top of my head) so I'll add some later. Incidentally, like the Eroica, to me this symphony either needs lots of power and/or a fleeter approach. Far too many of the accounts from the 50s to the 80s were either too ponderous, too exaggerated and mannered (especially in the first movement) or just too samey. If you want a perfect example of these then Bohm's chugging, dull 5th or Bernstein's later VPO version is a perfect example of all the above (although his Amnesty International account is very good) .


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

My preference for those earlier recordings is based on their understanding of the drama in Beethoven’s music. Newer recordings - like Honeck or Gardiner - seem to me to trivialize the music, as if they are in a hurry to just get through it.

Think about it: when you have an important point to get across, do you speak in a slow, thunderous, stern voice? Or do you try to impress your audience with how fast you can speak? Which style communicates power, authority, and intention?

To me, Beethoven conducted by Furtwängler is like Shakespeare read by Olivier. He understands all the correct inflections and the overall meaning behind the notes/words.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

I will admit that, great as it is, when I first got a recording (sometime in high school) I overplayed it and frankly became tired of it. The slow variations don't float my boat, and the finale, alyhough stirring, is just too much. Life isn't like that. Favorite smidgens include the double bass trio in the scherzo, and the end of he exposition in the first movement -- but I haven't voluntarily put it on in years. (I can play it in my head whenever I want.)


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Art Rock said:


> I have the 70s Karajan on DG, which suits me fine - in general, I don't care for multiple versions of the same work.


I have a few recordings, but honestly I think some people on this forum are out of their minds. To actually own 30, 40, 50 Beethoven cycles? I'd be entirely sick of a work just trying to collect a top 5. Especially a grab 'em by the throat work like Beethoven's 5th.


----------



## bharbeke (Mar 4, 2013)

I love a lot of recordings of it. Here are some of the most notable:

Stanislaw Skrowaczewski/Saarbrucken Radio Symphony (1st movement sounds perfect, finale is terrific)
Wyn Morris/London Symphony Orchestra (wonderful 2nd movement)
Szell/Cleveland Orchestra (wonderful 2nd movement)
Solti/Chicago Symphony Orchestra 1970's recording (the whole piece sounds very majestic)


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

*From a performer's perspective:
*
*Do you like this work*? Yes, I never tire of playing the 5th. Great fun.
*Do you love it? Why?*No. Respect, enjoy...yes. Can't say I "love" any Beethoven symphony like I do those of Mahler or others.
*What do you like about it?*The astonishing display of genius in the composition. The brilliant orchestration. The emotional power.
*Do you have any reservations about it?* No.
*Do you feel it's overrated?* Not at all. It is without doubt one of the greatest symphonies ever written.

It's also fun everytime I play it to see if the conductor is going to screw up the first movement. All those starts and stops are tricky, and woe to the "maestro" who really doesn't get it.

Favorite Recording: Paavo Jarvi on RCA. Just the right size orchestra in spectacular sound. This symphony was written for a chamber-orchestra sized ensemble. Using the full string complement of big orchestras ruins the balance of strings, wind, and brass.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Beethoven Sym#5 is justly considered one of the greatest symphonies...very powerful, intense, beyond anything that preceded it except possibly "Eroica"...in #5 Beethoven dramatically increases the orchestra, to what will become standard instrumentation - 
he adds top - Piccolo; bottom - contrabassoon; and lots of power - 3 trombones.

the great buildup to the finale is unprecedented, except perhaps Lenore #3 - the great "tutti" C Major explosion can still rock the house some 2 centuries later...

Reiner/CSO is my favorite - Reiner, like Toscanini, fully understood the drama, the flow of the work....He really drives it, too - the first movement is just blistering, white hot - with that driving, "front of the beat" playing that Reiner so often generated...
The great eruption of the finale is awesome, best I've ever heard - Reiner holds his guys in check, tho they'are straining at the reins to cut loose.....then - C Major explosion!! again, the last movement is driven ahead, with tremendous sonorities, but remarkable clarity....wonderful accelerando into the presto at the conclusion...

In my own experience, I believe I have performed Beethoven Sym #5 more than any other symphony - Dvorak 9, Schubert 8, LvB #7, Brahms 2 and 4 being other contenders....I've always enjoyed playing this great work - good part, lots of solos, and fine ensemble stuff...a good performance always leaves me with a warm feeling of accomplishment. Always gets a rousing audience response...


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

science said:


> Anyway, as usual, the main questions are: *Do you like this work? Do you love it? Why? What do you like about it? ?*


*

Just being subjective, when I was a young man, the 5th taught me how to deal with temptation/insecurity.

It starts with a struggle - should I do this? should I go there? - and matches the way my mind thinks when I get alone and thinking things like "Do I really need to purchase another box set?" (Which is what I'm struggling with now.) The second movement moves from C minor to A flat - where you leave the state you were in for another place, like being around people (which I'm going to be doing in a couple hours). So the g in c minor moves to A flat major, signalling relief from the struggle: just moving up one-half step ends the problem. Getting home, the struggle tries to re-enter, but it turns into a skeleton of itself, and the full move to C major signals the end of the struggle.

I like getting practical lessons from the classics.*


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Brahmsianhorn said:


> My preference for those earlier recordings is based on their understanding of the drama in Beethoven's music. Newer recordings - like Honeck or Gardiner - seem to me to trivialize the music, as if they are in a hurry to just get through it.


I understand that Gardiner's Beethoven isn't for everyone and to some it may sound 'rushed' so I'm used to such a criticism however levelling the same complaint against Honeck's recording is utterly ridiculous. Have you actually heard it and if so was it on a decent system? It's immense! Honeck is not one of the 'HIP Mafia' (a hugely derogatory term, btw) but a respected and talented conductor, very highly thought of by musicians, critics and orchestras. He's not some hipster HIPer. As a violinist in the VPO, he played under many of the great conductors of the 20th century and learned a lot from them (Karajan, Abbado, Harnoncourt, Bernstein, Kubelik, etc) but his real idol was Carlos Kleiber (which is obvious if you listen to this 5th and 7th). His Pittsburgh disc is not a 100mph race through the 5th and in fact comes in roughly at the same overall timing as Furtwangler's live 1940's recording of the 5th and 7th symphonies so if Honeck rushes through then so does Furtwangler (70 mins for both)! As for 'trivialising' Beethoven you must be hearing something that the hundreds of positive reviews of this recording didn't hear.

_"The opening of Honeck's Fifth is weighty without being mannered, and harks back to an older tradition of Beethoven." (Classicalnet review)_

I could quote many reviews from buyers and critics who don't hear a mad, unimpassioned race through the 5th but a dynamic, massive, thrilling, incredibly recorded account but I'll leave you with MusicWeb's summation of this recording which actually echoes my exact thoughts:

_"There are hundreds of recordings of these symphonies. I own around 25-30. Are these "the best"? Well, that's a fool's errand. There is no such thing. However *very few recordings have ever been better played, or conducted or engineered*. You might prefer the Fifth-Seventh coupling by Honeck's inspiration, Carlos Kleiber. That's an extraordinary disc. For an American recording, you might prefer George Szell and the Cleveland Orchestra but this disc is in the conversation with such illustrious names. Considering some high profile recordings from the last 20 years, this is far more impassioned than the robotically played Vänskä/Minnesota SACD; it's in better sound than Mackerras on Hyperion; it exceeds Rattle in every way; it is marginally more characterful than Haitink/LSO; it has a better orchestra than Norrington, Skrowaczewski, Krivine, Tremblay or Kuhn. Honeck's decisions are wiser and more mature than Pletnev's and there is more energy and vibrancy than Thielemann/Dresden. I like many of those recordings, and even love several - Mackerras, Skrowaczewski, Haitink - but I like this one more.*In other words, the Pittsburgh/Honeck Beethoven album reaches the shortlist of this century's great Beethoven symphony recordings*."_



Brahmsianhorn said:


> Think about it: when you have an important point to get across, do you speak in a slow, thunderous, stern voice? Or do you try to impress your audience with how fast you can speak? Which style communicates power, authority, and intention?


I just listen to what is being said and whether I like it. I don't care who's sayng it as I'm not impressed by reputation and not not swayed by what my peers think. Personally, if someone spoke to me in a "slow, thunderous, stern voice I'd yawn or I'd think they were arrogant and tell them to ***** off and if they talked to me slowly I'd either think they were being patronising or I'd fall asleep. 



starthrower said:


> I have a few recordings, but honestly I think some people on this forum are out of their minds. To actually own 30, 40, 50 Beethoven cycles? .


LOL, as I have triple that amount, then I must be officially completely batsh*t crazy! I can't help it....I think it may be an illness.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

starthrower said:


> I have a few recordings, but honestly I think some people on this forum are out of their minds. To actually own 30, 40, 50 Beethoven cycles? I'd be entirely sick of a work just trying to collect a top 5. Especially a grab 'em by the throat work like Beethoven's 5th.


I'm on the same page as you and Art Rock on this. However, if it leads to constructive discussion about the different interpretations (as evidenced here) it's fine.

But honestly where would the classical recording industry be without those who collect multiple interps? If everyone just purchased one or two interpretations of the same piece, it's a logical conclusion to say that much less money would be going into the till. That is however a topic in itself, unrelated to this thread.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

Merl said:


> I understand that Gardiner's Beethoven isn't for everyone and to some it may sound 'rushed' so I'm used to such a criticism however levelling the same complaint against Honeck's recording is utterly ridiculous. Have you actually heard it and if so was it on a decent system? It's immense! Honeck is not one of the 'HIP Mafia' (a hugely derogatory term, btw) but a respected and talented conductor, very highly thought of by musicians, critics and orchestras. He's not some hipster HIPer. As a violinist in the VPO, he played under many of the great conductors of the 20th century and learned a lot from them (Karajan, Abbado, Harnoncourt, Bernstein, Kubelik, etc) but his real idol was Carlos Kleiber (which is obvious if you listen to this 5th and 7th). His Pittsburgh disc is not a 100mph race through the 5th and in fact comes in roughly at the same overall timing as Furtwangler's live 1940's recording of the 5th and 7th symphonies so if Honeck rushes through then so does Furtwangler (70 mins for both)! As for 'trivialising' Beethoven you must be hearing something that the hundreds of positive reviews of this recording didn't hear.
> 
> _"The opening of Honeck's Fifth is weighty without being mannered, and harks back to an older tradition of Beethoven." (Classicalnet review)_
> 
> ...


I just think Honeck is too mechanical and slick. For the record, C. Kleiber also strikes me this way which is why I call his version overrated. I listen to Beethoven to be moved, not to be impressed. Once you experience the emotions at this level you cannot go back, even if a particular recording is hi-fi. Like I said, that only trivializes Beethoven's music.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

Karajan/Berlin Phil.('63) and Solti/Vienna Phil. (late '50s) are fine for me.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Sid James said:


> I'm on the same page as you and Art Rock on this. However, if it leads to constructive discussion about the different interpretations (as evidenced here) it's fine.


Yeah, I take full advantage when looking for a recording. I search old threads and read all the posts by the batsh*t crazy members like Merl! But seriously, you guys are a big help. Realdealblues is my encyclopedia for standard repertoire.

And I do enjoy B's 5th from time to time. It's like a force of nature you can't resist. But I don't read as much into it as Manx does. It's just great music!


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

If you are fascinated by the art of interpretation, I think Beethoven’s 5th makes a great test case for comparison. In fact, in the video that came out a couple of decades ago, “The Art of Conducting,” they switch between different conductors conducting the opening movement. I think the transition to the finale is also a great mode of comparison.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

I played this to death when I was in my teens, using the only recording that my family had, which was Klemperer leading one of those German Radio Orchestras on Vox, then Szell/Cleveland when I bought my first cycle. It takes a real thumper of a performance to get me going now, due to the over familiarity. I also have Kleiber on Blu Ray Audio, probably the one I turn to when I ‘m in the mood


----------



## merlinus (Apr 12, 2014)

Brahmsianhorn said:


> I just think Honeck is too mechanical and slick. For the record, C. Kleiber also strikes me this way which is why I call his version overrated. I listen to Beethoven to be moved, not to be impressed. Once you experience the emotions at this level you cannot go back, even if a particular recording is hi-fi. Like I said, that only trivializes Beethoven's music.


Completely agree with you re: listening to LvB to be moved, not impressed. I certainly did not enjoy Honeck's LvB 3 for the same reasons you gave, and other interpretations as well.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

The great thing about the classical era composers, and Beethoven had his roots there, is that they wrote in a way that just about anyone could follow their development of a motive, theme, or idea. (I would certainly include Haydn and Mozart and perhaps a few others.) For me, what better example among many than to follow what Beethoven does with his fateful _Duh Duh Duh Duhh, Duh Duh Duh Duhh_ theme or rhytmic motif that seems to be inevitably knocking on his door? One does not have to be a master oneself to clearly hear him run his ideas through the gauntlet of his creative imagination and inspired genius. And there was something_ blue-collar _ in the best sense of the word about his developmental genius where he was willing to put in the time and effort to bring each work to its ultimate conclusion. It didn't just happen. That ability to follow a composer's thinking and development I feel has largely been lost in the contemporary world, perhaps because the later composers no longer felt the need to be understood on that level in that way. Beethoven's 5th was one of the first works I heard and it left an indelible impression because its rhythmic theme seems so insistent and inevitable... _Duh Duh Duh Duhh, Duh Duh Duh Duhh..._


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Larkenfield said:


> .....there was something_ blue-collar _ in the best sense of the word about his developmental genius where he was willing to put in the time and effort to bring each work to its ultimate conclusion.


Did you ever see Bernstein's presentation on LvB #5 - he makes essentially the same point...It's been many years since I've seen ot, but I remember it well - he presented all of Beethoven's discarded sketches of the coda to Sym 5/mvt I... of course, he discarded all of them 'til he got it right, and that's what we hear today....Lenny's point was that Beethoven worked it out, went thru many different ideas, but always came up with the right one. There's a final, inevitability, about Beethoven...he's always going to bring it home...

Look at the Leonore overtures - 
#1 - is really inconsequential, a blow off
#2 - getting there - very passionate, dramatic, but structurally unfocused, great content, form is not concise at all.
#3 - form and content brilliantly combined - a great masterpiece, a towering, dramatic orchestral showpiece...


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Heck148 said:


> Did you ever see Bernstein's presentation on LvB #5 - he makes essentially the same point...It's been many years since I've seen ot, but I remember it well - he presented all of Beethoven's discarded sketches of the coda to Sym 5/mvt I... of course, he discarded all of them 'til he got it right, and that's what we hear today....Lenny's point was that Beethoven worked it out, went thru many different ideas, but always came up with the right one. There's a final, inevitability, about Beethoven...he's always going to bring it home...


Here's Bernstein's lecture on Beethoven's 5th on Omnibus, ca 1950. I think this is the one you refer to. Good stuff!


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

KenOC said:


> Here's Bernstein's lecture on Beethoven's 5th on Omnibus, ca 1950. I think this is the one you refer to. Good stuff!


Yes, he went thru all the discarded versions of #5/I coda.....the final one was obviously the best, the right one....


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

One fun fact about this symphony is that it's one of the classical pieces that use the golden ratio:

_"In 1978, Derek Haylock argued about the presence of the golden section in the first movement of Beethoven's fifth. Claiming that the opening motto occurs exactly at the golden mean point of 0.618, namely in bar 372 of 601. What's more, the coda is 129 bars long, and, if you divide it using the golden section, you get 49:80. After the first 49 bars of the coda, Beethoven actually introduces a completely new tune that has not appeared in the movement so far, a real first in the history of classical music composition."_
https://www.cmuse.org/classical-pieces-with-the-golden-ratio/


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Heck148 said:


> Did you ever see Bernstein's presentation on LvB #5 - he makes essentially the same point...It's been many years since I've seen ot, but I remember it well - he presented all of Beethoven's discarded sketches of the coda to Sym 5/mvt I... of course, he discarded all of them 'til he got it right, and that's what we hear today....Lenny's point was that Beethoven worked it out, went thru many different ideas, but always came up with the right one. There's a final, inevitability, about Beethoven...he's always going to bring it home...
> 
> Look at the Leonore overtures -
> #1 - is really inconsequential, a blow off
> ...


But that's NOT the order he wrote them in. The first version was what is now known as #2. The famous and popular #3 is actually the second version. The next revision, the third version, is called #1. Then came the Fidelio Overture. BTW, #3 is a s.o.b. to play. Thrilling it is, but so difficult for the orchestra.


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

mbhaub said:


> But that's NOT the order he wrote them in. The first version was what is now known as #2. The famous and popular #3 is actually the second version. The next revision, the third version, is called #1. Then came the Fidelio Overture. BTW, #3 is a s.o.b. to play. Thrilling it is, but so difficult for the orchestra.


yes, i know the order is different chronologically - but creatively, #3 is the culmination...."Fidelio" is very good also, but nothing touches #3....it is a b^tch to play - lots of audition licks in there!!


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

Judith said:


> Programme recently on BBC about this symphony and what was going on in his mind when he composed it. Some people thought it was to do with the French Revolution at the time, but I'm going with the theory of him being frustrated at going deaf, as the first few notes reflect. What does anyone else think? The whole symphony was shown performed by "Orchestre Revolutionnaire et Romantique" using the original instruments of the time and was conducted by John Eliot Gardiner.


This is from an old thread on this work. I thought it might be interesting to provoke a bit of discussion here too...



EdwardBast said:


> By framing the problem of interpreting the Fifth Symphony as primarily one of programmatic music versus pure or absolute music we (meaning you , that is, most posters upthread) are perpetuating a more than two-century old mistake. As several prominent musical narrative theorists have recently argued, what Beethoven accomplishes in the Fifth is something far more subtle, universal and important than hiding a specific program or story in its structure. What he did, they argue, was successfully apply a new formal principle: using an abstract plot structure, that is, one without any specific referents in the real world, to solve the most important formal problem facing him: how to convincingly unify highly expressive multimovement works from beginning to end. The purely technical part of the solution is obvious: bring back or transform the themes of earlier movements in the finale and elsewhere, a procedure commonly called cyclic structure. The Fifth Symphony is one of the first works of Beethoven to do this systematically. But if ones opening movement is unique and strikingly expressive, as in the Fifth, truly effective unity requires that the later movements respond not only to its technical elements, but to its expressive dimension as well. Beethoven's solution, the narrativists argue, was to organize the thematic reprises and transformations entailed in cyclic structure according to a comprehensive expressive plan, what they would call an abstract plot structure.
> 
> The elements of this plot structure are (1) an overall progression from stormy music in the minor mode in the first movement to the triumphant, exuberant music of a major mode finale, which by convention is heard as a move from a negative expressive state to a positive one - something like anguish to joy, despair to hope, dark to light, sickness to health, whatever. (2) Reprising in the finale material recalling the dark first movement, as in the da-da-da-dum second subject of the scherzo, to both threaten a return to the initial negative state of the first movement and to emphasize the trajectory toward the light embodied in the themes of the finale. In this way Beethoven makes the finale respond to the expressive character of the first movement, thus simultaneously rounding off the structure through a grand thematic recapitulation while imposing a satisfying expressive resolution.
> 
> The abstract "plot" of the Fifth, that is, roughly, dark to light with a threat of reversal in the finale, is so general that it could accommodate any number of real-world stories. This storied quality in its structure is why listeners and critics, probably including whoever wrote the BBC program mentioned above, have for centuries been deceived into thinking that it must have been intended to express some specific program. I think the Fifth does have great human significance, but trying to reduce this significance to a specific program or biographically based story cheapens the work, dragging the universal down to a mundane level.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

mbhaub said:


> Speaking as an orchestral player: this symphony is over-played, and often done badly. I play it far more often than any of the others. And yet, every time it comes up it's a marvel to play. Not a wasted note, the parts are all exciting and interesting to play. It remains ever-fresh and that's something that cannot be said of repeatedly playing other composer's symphonies. Audiences never tire of it either. It is indestructible although I've played it with more than one conductor who did their best; it's astonishing how many baton wielders cannot manage the beginning and can't manage the transition from III to IV adequately.
> 
> Why is it so popular? It's exciting! Full of electricity - but not for conductors who fail to heed Beethoven's fast, and correct, tempi.


There's another POV from a different thread.

And from a time when people were still unembarrassed to promote Kleiber:



DiesIraeCX said:


> There is an absolute wealth of great Beethoven 5th recording. There is no definitive recording, but a very highly regarded (and rightly so!) recording is Carlos Kleiber's. It's a great place to start! Good luck.
> 
> For "apocalyptic aural destruction", Furtwangler might be your best bet.


----------



## Pat Fairlea (Dec 9, 2015)

My introduction to Beethoven's 5th was via a cheap LP recording of the Pittsburgh SO conducted by William Steinberg. I no longer have the LP, but from memory it was a fairly full-blooded, energetic performance and that's still how I prefer to hear this symphony. Furtwangler may have coaxed subtleties out of it, and Klemperer's versions were delicately nuanced, but I really think that can be overdone. Like B's 7th symphony, this one overflows with life and energy.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

One can see Beethoven's thematic development as well as hear it-a picture is worth a 1000 motifs:


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Pat Fairlea said:


> My introduction to Beethoven's 5th was via a cheap LP recording of the Pittsburgh SO conducted by William Steinberg.


Hey, me too! I got it in the bargain bin at Tower Records back when I was a starving student. I need to dig that out and hear it again now that I am "sophisticated."


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

Manxfeeder said:


> Hey, me too! I got it in the bargain bin at Tower Records back when I was a starving student. I need to dig that out and hear it again now that I am "sophisticated."


if it's the one on Command LP, it is very good!! tmk, never issued on cd


----------

