# Fast recordings of Beethoven's Pastoral Symphony



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Just as the thread title indicates, I am looking for very fast recordings of Beethoven's Pastoral symphony. I know some seem to think that what I'm asking for is blasphemous, and maybe it is. All I know is that I would prefer the opening movement to move at breakneck speed. I want to feel like I'm behind the wheel of a Ferrari driving down a country road. :lol: 

Any takers? All of the recordings that I know of are not fast enough...


----------



## amfortas (Jun 15, 2011)

May I ask . . . why?


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Try Riccardo Chailly. His Beethoven cycle is notorious for the fast tempos.


----------



## Bourdon (Jan 4, 2019)

flamencosketches said:


> Just as the thread title indicates, I am looking for very fast recordings of Beethoven's Pastoral symphony. I know some seem to think that what I'm asking for is blasphemous, and maybe it is. All I know is that I would prefer the opening movement to move at breakneck speed. I want to feel like I'm behind the wheel of a Ferrari driving down a country road. :lol:
> 
> Any takers? All of the recordings that I know of are not fast enough...


Better take a bike and you will see more.....


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

You can take any recording and speed it up as fast as you like with Audacity, a free music editing program. The pitches of the notes will be unchanged. Bruno Walter wants you to do this!


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

Scherchen is pretty fast.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

amfortas said:


> May I ask . . . why?


There are some things where I would prefer not to know the answer.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

I believe that the tempo can be pushed only so fast or it begins to sound nervous.

Klieber's is faster than usual (even faster than Toscanini's versions) but to me it sounds rushed and doesn't gel at the tempo that he's taking - the fastest I've heard:






A rather exhilarating version by Frans Bruggen:






Another slightly faster tempo than usual... and a very nice performance by the London Symphony Orchestra:






Bernstein pushes the tempo a bit but not excessively:






But I wouldn't trade any of the faster versions for Furtwangler's beautifully rich yet luxuriant slower one. I find that it has great emotional depth and power without being oppressive. I can hear and savor everything as clear as day. It has staying power like Nature herself who's never in a rush even during a storm:






I find the Pastoral a truly wonderful symphony. It seems completely unlike fhe others and is not about him. Nature seems to speak through him.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Yeah, I agree withxScherchen. His 1965 live Lugano Pastoral is particularly bracing. Otherwise Paray, Chailly, Norrington (both} and Pletnev are very quick in the first movement. Some people think those speeds make the music sound rushed but, to me, that's not always the case. Scherchen, for example starts off super-quick and then decelerates to give you a breather.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Must confess Kleiber misses it in this performance. I think it was the only time he conducted it


----------



## Guest (Sep 11, 2019)

Maybe Immerseel's recording with Anima Eterna? That's the fastest I know, and HIP.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Must confess Kleiber misses it in this performance. I think it was the only time he conducted it
Chailly is also too fast. If you want to faster performance Beecham and Karajan (1850s) get it right


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Thanks for the (serious) responses, everyone. For those who question my intent, it is simply my taste. The opening movement just doesn't sound as good to me when played slowly. Most of the "classic" recordings I've heard seem to drag. 

Of those I've listened to, the Kleiber, Chailly and Brüggen come close. I think I ought to hear more of the HIP ones, though I don't generally like HIP Beethoven much.


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

Kleiber's is a phycological picture in the mind. Just don't "look" at it as a music video of the country side like those inserted into the New Year's Concert's broadcast every year...

Scherchen/Lugano is just as fast and it is a much more vivid performance.

HIP is not necessarily fast. None of the ones I have go under 40 mins.

Some of the Karajan #6s are also fast.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Kiki said:


> Kleiber's is a phycological picture in the mind. Just don't "look" at it as a music video of the country side like those inserted into the New Year's Concert's broadcast every year...
> 
> Scherchen/Lugano is just as fast and it is a much more vivid performance.
> 
> ...


Agreed, Karajan is no slouch in the 6th (but some will say he never got the measure of the 6th - I disagree)

If you were to adhere strictly to Beethoven's metronome marks, the timings for the symphony would be as follows:

I - 9:53 or 7:47 without repeat
II - 11:07
III - 4:47 or 2:40 without repeat
IV - 3:52
V - 8:48

So, using the metronome marks the total timing for the symphony comes in just short of 39 minutes.

As few have got close to Beethovens metronome mark, I often go off the first movement for an indication of speed. Those who take the first movement at a brisk clip usually do the shortest Pastoral (although this isn't always the case). So, in essence, you're looking for sub 11:30 minute first movements. Chailly is 10:17, Immerseel 10:37, Lan Shui 10:16, Scherchen (studio) 9:36, Scherchen (live Lugano) 9:41 but he slows down considerably towards the end, Norrington LCP 10:30, Norrington Hannsler (wayyyyy better than his LCP) 10:41, Zinman 10:21. There are many others but without going thru all 130+ cycles I have, I'll just suggest those for now. BTW, compared to these, Gardiner's 11:14 seems slow in comparison (although it certainly isn't) . Lol. I'll look for some others later, after I've eaten. Oh and a word of warning - as Kiki said don't instantly think that HIP will mean brisk. Some HIP accounts weigh in at well over 12 minutes.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

At the other end of the spectrum Celi takes an excruciating 51 minutes to complete the Pastoral! He manages to make the ride thru the country sound like the limp of a dying man through a swamp, makes the brook seem stagnant, kills the dance, makes the storm seem to last for hours and totally ruins the shepherd's song. No joy, no vitality, no emotion, just excruciating. If you haven't gathered, I don't like it. Haha

'Traditional' moderate recordings of the Pastoral are usually around the 12 minute mark.


----------



## Ras (Oct 6, 2017)

Merl said:


> If you were to adhere strictly to Beethoven's metronome marks, the timings for the symphony would be as follows:
> 
> I - 9:53 or 7:47 without repeat
> II - 11:07
> ...


*Charles MacKerras' recording from EMI with Royal Liverpool Philharmonic has these timings:

11:18
11:13
4:47
3:19
8:47*

So provided he takes all the repeats??? all movements except the first are almost exactly paced as Beethoven prescribed!


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Ras said:


> *Charles MacKerras' recording from EMI with Royal Liverpool Philharmonic has these timings:
> 
> 11:18
> 11:13
> ...


It's certainly a brisk reading. Very similar to Gardiner, and one which I like a lot. You can pick that set up on Ebay for buttons at the moment.
*
Edit: a few more swift ones.... Cambreling 10:35, Herrweghe 10:39, Krivine 10:53, Antonini 10:53, Dausgaard 10:52, Bruggen (1st cycle) 11:00, Gielen (2nd cycle) 10:19, Hogwood 10:31, Drahos 11:06, Goodman 10:48, Adam Fischer 10:51, Jordan VPO 11:06, Stangel 10:55, Nelson 10:46*


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Here's a nice quick *Pastoral 1st movement*, just 8 minutes. Doesn't get much brisker than that!


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

KenOC said:


> Here's a nice quick *Pastoral 1st movement*, just 8 minutes. Doesn't get much brisker than that!


That's gotta be without repeat!


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Merl said:


> That's gotta be without repeat!


It has the repeat, begins at 2:03.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Not listened to it yet . No cuts?


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Merl said:


> Not listened to it . No cuts?


Listen to it. It's only 8 minutes! No cuts.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

KenOC said:


> Listen to it. It's only 8 minutes! No cuts.


That's mental. It starts off quick and then gets quicker as it goes on. The last 2 minutes is batshit crazy. Sounds like it's been speeded up. Who is it, Ken? Lol


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

It's Chailly. He took the movement far too slowly so I helped him out by adjusting the tempo. I'm sure he'll be grateful if he ever finds out! :lol:

BTW it's very apparent in this version that Chailly speeds up the music as the movement proceeds, and by quite a bit at that. I wonder if that's a standard conducting trick.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

KenOC said:


> It's Chailly. He took the movement far too slowly so I helped him out by adjusting the tempo. I'm sure he'll be grateful if he ever finds out! :lol:
> 
> BTW it's very apparent in this version that Chailly speeds up the music as the movement proceeds, and by quite a bit at that. I wonder if that's a standard conducting trick.


Some speed it up. Scherchen, on the other hand speeds up a bit then slows down. Depends on the conductor. Did notice that about the Chailly recording though (it's the cycle I keep on my phone). Adam Fischer, in his new cycle, speeds up towards the end. There are some who keep a perfect line thru it (Karajan, Skrowaczewski, Blomstedt (twice), Maag and Wand spring to mind) .


----------



## premont (May 7, 2015)

I may have misunderstood something important, but what is the point of a fast recording?


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

One thing we have to remember is that orchestras in Beethoven's time probably could not play the music as fast as musicians today as many musicians in orchestras in those days were amateurs. To play it at speeds like Chailly does with his crack orchestra just would not of been possible technically for the players with the revolutionary music which they would've found very difficult. In the entertaining movie Eroica we have to suspend disbelief that the orchestra could play the music at site as well as Gardiner's musicians. Not a chance! Beethoven is metronome markings are generally too fast for comfort. By far the best indicator is his markings .


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

DavidA said:


> One thing we have to remember is that orchestras in Beethoven's time probably could not play the music as fast as musicians today as many musicians in orchestras in those days were amateurs. To play it at speeds like Chailly does with his crack orchestra just would not of been possible technically for the players with the revolutionary music which they would've found very difficult. .


To say they were completely incapable of playing at Beethoven's speeds is totally wrong. We know that from anecdotal material, Beethoven's letters, research by Zander (etc) and numerous papers on the subject. True, many were amateurs but they were often damned fine musicians used to playing for extended periods (lets face it there was cock all else to do back then) at historically much faster speeds. Yes, Beethoven and other composers did complain about sloppy ensemble and lapses in pace but it was mainly due to lack of rehearsal. They did have the technical ability (if university bands and amateur orchestras can play Beethoven competently then I'm sure these seasoned musicians could). It was a big deal and a big gig (with decent money) getting picked to play a major composer's symphonies and the best players were often cherry-picked and drafted in from elsewhere for the opportunity and would play their hearts out to get the next gig and impress. Also, you need to remember that orchestras were MUCH smaller at that time.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

premont said:


> I may have misunderstood something important, but what is the point of a fast recording?


The point is that I like the way it sounds fast... I don't think that's terribly difficult to understand, is it?


----------



## Johnnie Burgess (Aug 30, 2015)

Walter Weller and The City of Birmingham symphony orchestra does the first movement in 9:35.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Johnnie Burgess said:


> Walter Weller and The City of Birmingham symphony orchestra does the first movement in 9:35.


... Without repeat.


----------



## gardibolt (May 22, 2015)

Merl said:


> Agreed, Karajan is no slouch in the 6th (but some will say he never got the measure of the 6th - I disagree)
> 
> If you were to adhere strictly to Beethoven's metronome marks, the timings for the symphony would be as follows:
> 
> ...


Here are the ones on my list that have the first movement close to these standards:
Bernstein, NY Ph 1963 (TAKES ALL REPEATS)
I. 11:11 Repeat: Yes

Blomstedt, Staatskapelle Dresden
I. 9:31 Repeat: No

Brüggen, O of 18th c. (TAKES ALL REPEATS)
I. 10:58 Repeat: Yes

Chailly, Leipzig Gewandhaus 2009 (TAKES ALL REPEATS)
I 10:18 Repeat: Yes

Gardiner, Orch Rév & Rom 1992 Archiv (TAKES ALL REPEATS)
I 11:13 Repeat: Yes

Hogwood, AAM (TAKES ALL REPEATS)
I. 10:31 Repeat: Yes

Karajan, Philharmonia O 1953
I. 9:21 Repeat: No

Karajan, Berlin PO 1962
I. 9:01 Repeat: No

Karajan, Berlin PO 1977
I. 9:09 Repeat: No

Karajan, Berlin PO 1982
I. 9:09 Repeat: No

Kleiber, Erich; London PO 1948
I 9:24 Repeat: No

Leibowitz, RSO (TAKES ALL REPEATS)
I. 11:25 Repeat: Yes

Mengelberg, Concertgebouw O 1940
I 9:13 Repeat: No

Munch, Boston SO
I. 9:04 Repeat: No

Paray, Detroit SO 1953
I. 7:51 Repeat: No

Victor de Sabata, Santa Cecilia Academy Orch 1947
I. 9:26 Repeat: No

Hermann Scherchen, Vienna State Opera Orch 1958
I 7:46 Repeat: No

Lan Shui, Copenhagen Ph 2011 (TAKES ALL REPEATS)
I 10:17 Repeat: Yes

Stangel, Pocket PO 2014 (TAKES ALL REPEATS)
I 10:57 Repeat: Yes

Toscanini BBC SO (1937)
I. 9:00 Repeat: No

Walter Philadelphia O
I. 9:01 Repeat: No

Zinman, Tonhalle Zurich (TAKES ALL REPEATS)
I. 10:24 Repeat: Yes

Scherchen and Paray are the only ones in my list who come up to Beethoven's speed. Lan Shui, Zinman and Chailly come the closest amongst the group that take the repeat (which is pretty essential to my mind). Klemperer Philadelphia O 1962 (live) trudges in at a fairly astonishing 14:18, with repeats. I'm kind of surprised Leibowitz is so slow; usually he's cracking along at the indicated metronome markings.


----------



## Guest (Oct 15, 2019)

Never mind the speed, feel the melody. We get, "dee-dee-der" repeated in endless variations. Beethoven obviously thought the four note phrase for the Fifth was way too complicated and needed to simplify.

If only Mozart had written it, it would have been something memorable. :devil:


----------

