# Furtwangler's Beethoven 9th 1942 April 19th recordings/releases



## luismsoaresmartins

I already own the release by Archipel on Furtwangler's Beethoven 9th on April 19th 1942, but would like to know if other transfers or remasterings are available, in order to compare the quality.

It's probably my favourite recording of Beethoven 9th, truly amazing capture of a terrifying moment in history!


----------



## DiesIraeCX

Absolutely, you must give Pristine Classical a try! Historical performances remastered, and they sound great. I have Brahms' 4 symphonies by Toscanini-1952, Beethoven's 9th by Furtwangler 1942 and 1954 (Lucerne, Furtwangler's last ever performance of the 9th), and Beethoven's 9th by Toscanini 1952.

LvB 1942 9th, Furtwangler - https://www.pristineclassical.com/pasc250.html

I swear by their remasters.





















*Remember that there is a preview of the recordings on the page, just press play for a big sample (usually an entire movement! not just 30 seconds).* For instance, listen to how great the Busch Quartet's recording of Beethoven's string quartets sound. Compare that to some random recording on Amazon, a world of difference.

https://www.pristineclassical.com/pacm093.html


----------



## Headphone Hermit

^^^ yes, Pristine are excellent for their samples ... if you like historic recordings, of course.


----------



## Albert7

This is a most wonderful historical recording. Lord Lance, who is in the midst of doing his Furtwangler listening month, shared with me his thoughts about this recording and despite the sound quality, there is a lot of energy in the playing which comes across rather well in fact.


----------



## phlrdfd

The one from Pristine and most other labels is from March of 1942. The one from April is a different performance; one given for Hitler's birthday. It was first made available a few years ago on Archipel. I have never heard it and have no desire to hear it. 

If the original poster doesn't have the March performance, that would be the one to seek out. I agree with the Pristine recommendation for sound.

With Furtwangler, it's sometimes necessary to be precise about performance dates because his performances varied. My favorite Eroica, by him or any other conductor, is from Dec. 8, 1952. The performance from Dec. 7, 1952 is also available on various labels, but I don't like the performance as much.


----------



## Lord Lance

Associating a performance with its dedicatee is absolute rubbish. Didn't think it would persist in 2015. It is like banning Wagner because Hitler and Nazis enjoyed it.

As for the performances, they're superlative. The very best <after Norrington, awful, bad, poor, mediocre, good, very good, excellent, one of the best and before the best>.

Go for it!


----------



## phlrdfd

Lord Lance said:


> Associating a performance with its dedicatee is absolute rubbish. Didn't think it would persist in 2015. It is like banning Wagner because Hitler and Nazis enjoyed it.
> 
> As for the performances, they're superlative. The very best <after Norrington, awful, bad, poor, mediocre, good, very good, excellent, one of the best and before the best>.
> 
> Go for it!


In general, I agree with you. But when Hitler was in the front row and the performance was given just for his pleasure, I make an exception (and I'm not blaming Furtwangler for concucting the performance when he had no choice if he wanted to remain free .... but the circumstances were what they were). Besides, even just based on the music, the March performance is available in much better sound than the one from April and is also a better performance IMO. So even if you cut out the Hitler factor, the March performance is the one to go for.


----------



## AClockworkOrange

Lord Lance said:


> Associating a performance with its dedicatee is absolute rubbish. Didn't think it would persist in 2015. It is like banning Wagner because Hitler and Nazis enjoyed it.!


I couldn't agree more Lord Lance.


----------



## phlrdfd

And we should all listen to what we want and not listen to what we don't want to listen to. I'm not trying to start an argument or debate about this. But I think it's fair to point out the unusual circumstances of the performance. As I understand it, after the buzz created by the March performances of the ninth, Furtwangler was forced to conduct it again for Hitler, who was sitting front row-center, by high ranking party officials who had the power to strip him not only of his career, but his life. 
There are good reasons why the March performance is available on many labels and the April performance seems only to be out on one, cheap pirate label, both musical and otherwise (just to clear up the contradiction above, which I couldn't correct because the board went down right after I wrote the posts, I've never owned the Archipel disc, but I've heard chunks of it and read enough opinions about it on other boards to be comfortable in saying the March performance is the one to have even if you aren't interested at all in the political circumstances of the performance ... of course, if you're a Furtwangler completist who has to have every performance of every piece he conducted, that's a different matter).


----------



## hpowders

There are a few different Furtwängler Beethoven 9th performances-Bayreuth, 1951, etc;

My favorite is Furtwängler's last recorded performance of Beethoven's 9th-the great Lucerne performance from 1954.


----------



## Lord Lance

hpowders said:


> There are a few different Furtwängler Beethoven 9th performances-Bayreuth, 1951, etc;
> 
> My favorite is Furtwängler's last recorded performance of Beethoven's 9th-the great Lucerne performance from 1954.


And all are good - supposedly - the most raved endlessly on about are 1942 March 22/23 and 1951. Having heard the 1942 remastered by the talented folks at Pristine Classical, I can attest it as being one of the finest performances of any Beethoven symphony. And I've heard a lot of 'em.

Still, someone should Beethoven 9 without Words.... Where's Maazel when you need him?


----------



## hpowders

Lord Lance said:


> And all are good - supposedly - the most raved endlessly on about are 1942 March 22/23 and 1951. Having heard the 1942 remastered by the talented folks at Pristine Classical, I can attest it as being one of the finest performances of any Beethoven symphony. And I've heard a lot of 'em.
> 
> Still, someone should Beethoven 9 without Words.... Where's Maazel when you need him?


After his demise, he's now simply "Maazel Without Words".


----------



## realdealblues

hpowders said:


> There are a few different Furtwängler Beethoven 9th performances-Bayreuth, 1951, etc;
> 
> My favorite is Furtwängler's last recorded performance of Beethoven's 9th-the great Lucerne performance from 1954.


That's my favorite as well. The 42 Berlin and 51 Bayreuth are fine but the final recording from 1954 had by far the best orchestral playing and overall conception in my opinion.


----------



## hpowders

realdealblues said:


> That's my favorite as well. The 42 Berlin and 51 Bayreuth are fine but the final recording from 1954 had by far the best orchestral playing and overall conception in my opinion.


Yes and how about that blazing coda at the very end!! Man I wish I was there!!


----------



## shadowdancer

realdealblues said:


> That's my favorite as well. The 42 Berlin and 51 Bayreuth are fine but the final recording from 1954 had by far the best orchestral playing and overall conception in my opinion.


I agree 110%. I will paste the cd cover here just to show how I enjoy this record.


----------



## Balthazar

I'll keep my eyes open for the '54 Lucerne. (Sounds like a tasty Burgundy.)

The only Furtwängler version I have is '51 from Salzburg with rather poor sound.


----------



## hpowders

Balthazar said:


> I'll keep my eyes open for the '54 Lucerne. (Sounds like a tasty Burgundy.)
> 
> The only Furtwängler version I have is '*51 from Salzburg with rather poor sound.*


Sounds like an old bottle of Thunderbird with no air left in the bottle.


----------



## Manxfeeder

On the Pristine website,they have the following options for the Busch:

Ambient Stereo 24-bit FLAC +€45.00
Ambient Stereo 16-bit FLAC +€27.00
Mono 16-bit FLAC +€27.00
320kbps Ambient Stereo MP3 +€21.00 

Which one is recommended? Thanks.


----------



## Albert7

Manxfeeder said:


> On the Pristine website,they have the following options for the Busch:
> 
> Ambient Stereo 24-bit FLAC +€45.00
> Ambient Stereo 16-bit FLAC +€27.00
> Mono 16-bit FLAC +€27.00
> 320kbps Ambient Stereo MP3 +€21.00
> 
> Which one is recommended? Thanks.


It depends... if you are loading onto an iPod, I would go for the MP3 version evidently... of course FLAC's are best if you want to burn into CD's.


----------



## Lord Lance

Manxfeeder said:


> On the Pristine website,they have the following options for the Busch:
> 
> Ambient Stereo 24-bit FLAC +€45.00
> Ambient Stereo 16-bit FLAC +€27.00
> Mono 16-bit FLAC +€27.00
> 320kbps Ambient Stereo MP3 +€21.00
> 
> Which one is recommended? Thanks.


Unless you're an audiophile with high-end equipment, stick to Mono FLAC because that is the original sound. But if not a purist in those matters, MP3 is fine. FLAC differences are _always _in the head. Multiple studies prove the point. Some headstrong folks would have you believe on the contrary.


----------



## Albert7

Lord Lance said:


> Unless you're an audiophile with high-end equipment, stick to Mono FLAC because that is the original sound. But if not a purist in those matters, MP3 is fine. FLAC differences are _always _in the head. Multiple studies prove the point. Some headstrong folks would have you believe on the contrary.


Mono FLAC is good for playback if you have a single speaker but with dual speakers, not the way to go in fact. And for portable mp3 players that support FLAC, you would want the stereo FLAC versions instead. Plus mono is going to be only 16-bit so if the guy wants 24-bit then stereo is the way to go for him.


----------



## Lord Lance

Albert7 said:


> Mono FLAC is good for playback if you have a single speaker but with dual speakers, not the way to go in fact. And for portable mp3 players that support FLAC, you would want the stereo FLAC versions instead. Plus mono is going to be only 16-bit so if the guy wants 24-bit then stereo is the way to go for him.


The central problem of these threads: preferences.


----------



## Albert7

Lord Lance said:


> The central problem of these threads: preferences.


For 90% of listeners, the mp3 version should suffice.  I really can't tell that much of a difference.


----------



## Lord Lance

Albert7 said:


> For 90% of listeners, the mp3 version should suffice.  I really can't tell that much of a difference.


Exactly. I really doubt the % of population using the equipment that would necessitate the benefits of mono. Sticking to MP3 it is!


----------



## Manxfeeder

Thanks for an interesting discussion!


----------



## AnotherSpin

I have March 1942 recording on Japan's Opus Kura label, it has very good transfer with minimal mastering intrusion and very impressive sound. All three recordings (March 1942, 1951, 1954) are exceptional, each with its own merits.


----------



## WJM

About the March 1942 recording... it's sometimes labelled as taken "March 21-24". What does this mean? Are this really recordings from a few different live concerts put together?


----------



## AnotherSpin

WJM said:


> About the March 1942 recording... it's sometimes labelled as taken "March 21-24". What does this mean? Are this really recordings from a few different live concerts put together?


 You may want to check info here: www.opuskura.com/cat_notes_e.htm


----------



## purefool

phlrdfd said:


> In general, I agree with you. But when Hitler was in the front row and the performance was given just for his pleasure, I make an exception (and I'm not blaming Furtwangler for concucting the performance when he had no choice if he wanted to remain free .... but the circumstances were what they were). .


I'm somewhat late in responding, and it may make no difference to your feelings on the matter anyway, but on a factual point, Hitler apparently did not attend the concert, although Goebbels was there, as can be seen in the trailer to the film Das Reichsorchester on the Berlin Philharmonic's Digital Concert Hall website https://www.digitalconcerthall.com/en/film/108


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

The performance with Hitler was on his birthday, 4/19/42, and there is a recording of it available on Archipel. Not worth more than historical interest as it is less coherent and much worse recorded than the one from a month earlier.


----------

