# Beethoven symphony cycle with the best sound and performance



## Notwithstanding

Looking for recommendations for a Beethoven symphony cycle or individual discs that both have great performances and great sound. In other words, I'm looking for the best modern Beethoven cycle... 

(I have the Karajan SACD cycle, along with Mackerras and Abbado cycles and I've just acquired the Vanska set...)

Thanks in advance for your replies.


----------



## KenOC

Sounds like you're doing well already. Might want to check out the Gardiner/ORR (IMO the finest HIP-type cycle) and the Vanska...oops, you already have that!

Also see:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/richpub/syltguides/fullview/R1L1EGKNY1ZC8X/ref=cm_pdp_sylt_title_2


----------



## davinci

The Harnoncourt/Chamber Orchestra of Europe cycle has intense performances with small orchestra and superb sonics. (Teldec Redbook CD). HIP with modern instruments....awesome.


----------



## neoshredder

I'll second the Gardiner suggestion. Great sound.


----------



## Notwithstanding

Thanks for all the suggestions. Form the samples of the 5th from both sets I acquired, Harnoncourt sounds very temting, but I was turned off by Gardiner's tempo. So I'm going to go with Harnoncourt now. Gardiner will be on my "to check" list for now....


----------



## davinci

Another modern-day cycle worth checking out is Barenboim/Staatskapelle Berlin, 1999. It is a slow interpretation, similiar to Furtwangler or Klemperer, but the sonics are outstanding. Released on Warner Classics, it was engineered by Teldec and you can't get better than that IMO. The mic'ing techniques reveal a great presence of the hall and the size of the orchestra. 
Barenboim goes with the traditional layout with 2nd violins on the right side: cello and bass on left. And it's a big sound; not everybody's cup of tea, but the sound is as good as it gets on Redbook.


----------



## AClockworkOrange

I'll have to agree with davinci's suggestion of the Barenboim/Staatskapelle Berlin. This was my second set (my first being Furtwangler) and the sound quality and performances are to a consistently high standard. Much, much better than his cycle with the W-E Divan Orchestra.

I must admit though, the Harnoncourt looks very good too (I've just discovered him fairly recently through his symphonic cycles of Schubert and Schumann and I am very impressed with his and his orchestras performances and sound quality). I'm curious about those recordings myself now.


----------



## Guest

The Vanska cycle that you already have is what you are looking for. Excellent cycle.


----------



## Notwithstanding

Thanks friends. I pulled the trigger on all of the recommendations: Harnoncourt, Gardiner and Barenboim. 

I'm excited to check them out...


----------



## techniquest

I just come back from shopping. I bought the Barenboim/Staatskapelle set on Warner Classics in HMV for £14. If that's not a bargain, then I don't know what is. Now I'm going to settle down and listen to my two current faves (no.s 6 and 9)


----------



## muxamed

Vänskä and Harnoncourt


----------



## Vaneyes

COE/Harnoncourt, Bremen CO/Paavo Jarvi. The latter in DVD box, or LPs--strangely, no CD box yet, if ever.


----------



## AClockworkOrange

Thinking on this thread, I've ended up picking up the Harnoncourt cycle as mentioned by davinci myself.


----------



## bigshot

My favorite Beethoven cycle now is Kletzki / Czech PO. I have so much Beethoven, I didn't think I'd find another one that made me sit up and take notice, but this one is it.


----------



## tgtr0660

Gardiner and Harnoncourt kill Beethoven, but Jarvi and Vanska don't, if you really want a HIP cycle. Chailly has the best sound of all cycles I would say, but the performances (the conductor's choices of speed, tempo annd many other factors) are an acquired taste. If you are into his style, the sound and the playing by the Gewandhaus is out of this Earth.


----------



## davinci

tgtr0660 said:


> Gardiner and Harnoncourt kill Beethoven, but Jarvi and Vanska don't, if you really want a HIP cycle. Chailly has the best sound of all cycles I would say, but the performances (the conductor's choices of speed, tempo annd many other factors) are an acquired taste. If you are into his style, the sound and the playing by the Gewandhaus is out of this Earth.


I have quite a few Chailly recordings...wasn't aware of his Beethoven. I see the box set is very expensive. How would you describe his Beethoven; I know that is subjective, but please try.


----------



## tgtr0660

Light, airy, fast. Italianate. If you have ever heard Chailly's Bach's St Matthew Passion, you'd probay agree he somewhat makes it sound italian, or even Mozartean. His Beethoven recent cycle is like that. Is a good heir of Toscanini's legendary NBC one. The playing of the orchestra can't be any better, and the recording sound is crystal clear and balanced, perfect. The cycle could be the best ever for someone with that taste in Beethoven. For me, it takes some drama, some "romanticism", some tragedy, some struggle out, away from the music. Some moments work well (his 4th is good, his 8th is good, the first movement of the Eroica is great), but some, for me, are disappointing (the rest of the Eroica, the 7th -which should be great but isn't-, his 9th (specially the glorious first movement). What sounds like chaos and cataclysm with others sounds just like a little storm with Chailly. So you get an idea, think that Furtwangler's slow but heart-stopping rendition of the adagio of the 9th is the best I've heard. I'm not all for slow speeds (they can be bad, Karl Bohm's 9th for me is another disaster, worse than Chailly's by far) but I'm all for emotion and drama, and Chailly is weak on that. But if you like clear sound, clear textures, amazing playing, and a light, speedy touch for your Ludwig, you can't go wrong with Chailly. Hell, it sounds so well that it might even grow on me one day.


----------



## bigshot

Yow! Toscanini's Beethoven is about as far from light and airy and Mozartian as you can get! He's pure fire and fury!


----------



## tgtr0660

Yes, I'd say Chailly brings Toscanini speed but leaves out some fury. Chailly is somewhat literal, light on interpretation. I forgot to mention his is not a HIP performance though. There are elements in there but there's a healthy dose of vibrato.


----------



## KenOC

Just a note for those who don't know this. Bruno Walter's set of Beethoven symphonies with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra is available (download only) in fantastic Sony remasters --for nine bucks! His symphonies #2 and #4 are hard to beat, and the Pastoral -- well, it's simply the finest performance of the stereo era. Trust me on this!

The recordings are very good, far better than the original Columbia reissues (which weren't bad to start with). This set is a bargain and a necessary supplement to sets like the Chailly, Gardiner and others that shine less in the even-numbered symphonies.

http://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-Vol..._shvl_album_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1357619347&sr=301-4


----------



## davinci

tgtr0660 said:


> Light, airy, fast. Italianate. If you have ever heard Chailly's Bach's St Matthew Passion, you'd probay agree he somewhat makes it sound italian, or even Mozartean. His Beethoven recent cycle is like that. Is a good heir of Toscanini's legendary NBC one. The playing of the orchestra can't be any better, and the recording sound is crystal clear and balanced, perfect. The cycle could be the best ever for someone with that taste in Beethoven. For me, it takes some drama, some "romanticism", some tragedy, some struggle out, away from the music. Some moments work well (his 4th is good, his 8th is good, the first movement of the Eroica is great), but some, for me, are disappointing (the rest of the Eroica, the 7th -which should be great but isn't-, his 9th (specially the glorious first movement). What sounds like chaos and cataclysm with others sounds just like a little storm with Chailly. So you get an idea, think that Furtwangler's slow but heart-stopping rendition of the adagio of the 9th is the best I've heard. I'm not all for slow speeds (they can be bad, Karl Bohm's 9th for me is another disaster, worse than Chailly's by far) but I'm all for emotion and drama, and Chailly is weak on that. But if you like clear sound, clear textures, amazing playing, and a light, speedy touch for your Ludwig, you can't go wrong with Chailly. Hell, it sounds so well that it might even grow on me one day.


Thanks for the reply. I like many diff interpretations of Ludwig Van...from Furtwangler slow to Gardiner fast and HIP. But I'm not too keen on Toscanini. 
No cycle is perfect, but I'll check out some samples and the individual releases. No wonder it's in good sound...it's on Decca.


----------



## vertigo

Does anyone know of a site where the Karajan SACD cycle is downloadable in 24-bit format?
Thanks in advance.


----------



## DavidA

I have the Chailly which, as someone says, sounds incredible. I do find the performances exciting but a bit unrelenting. But perhaps they will grow on me too. Certainly worth hearing. I got the box when it was on offer for just over twenty quid. 
For me the best all round is Karajan.
I also have Toscanini but the sound is relatively poor. Performances are tremendous.
If you want something slower and more rugged then why not give Klemperer a try? I actually have two sets of his, one studio the other live broadcasts. The old guy was a slow coach but he knew how to build a performance. The ninth live is a really great build up to the Ode to Joy. 
I got Harnoncourt as a cheap download for eight quid together with the violin concerto and Missa Solemnis. Great bargain. He deserves hearing in the symphonies. For me he doesn't kill them.
Don't forget Kleiber in 5 & 7 which are really special.


----------



## davinci

I'm having a difficult time finding good quality Furtwängler on CD. I'm looking for single sets, rather than taking a chance on the full cycle. So far this remaster has the best mono transfer.









Any recommendations on recent Furtwängler remasters?


----------



## Vaneyes

I couldn't help but notice, that "kill" has been used a couple of times. Does that mean good or bad? TIA for the answer.


----------



## realdealblues

davinci said:


> I'm having a difficult time finding good quality Furtwängler on CD. I'm looking for single sets, rather than taking a chance on the full cycle. So far this remaster has the best mono transfer.
> 
> View attachment 12245
> 
> 
> Any recommendations on recent Furtwängler remasters?


I haven't seen any new transfers really. I don't know that there are any that sound "great" due to their age, but I have both of these sets and find them both to have as good as any.

This one with Symphonies 1-9









This one with Symphonies 3,4,5,6,7, & 9 + Leonore, No. 3 and Coriolan Overtures









They are all different versions and to me are the best you can get from Furtwangler other than maybe adding a couple individual recordings (like Tahra's release of the 9th from 1954).

But those box sets are probably the best we will ever get of Furtwangler's Beethoven recordings.


----------



## Guest

davinci said:


> I'm having a difficult time finding good quality Furtwängler on CD. I'm looking for single sets, rather than taking a chance on the full cycle. So far this remaster has the best mono transfer.
> 
> View attachment 12245
> 
> 
> Any recommendations on recent Furtwängler remasters?


I don't know if this is the one in that box set from EMI, but this is the one that I have, and enjoy greatly - the 9th symphony recorded in 1951 at Bayreuth.


----------



## realdealblues

DrMike said:


> I don't know if this is the one in that box set from EMI, but this is the one that I have, and enjoy greatly - the 9th symphony recorded in 1951 at Bayreuth.
> View attachment 12263


Yes, that's the one included in the EMI Box Set I listed. There is no difference sonically either from what I can tell.


----------



## realdealblues

Just for the record. The EMI box set is:
1. 1952 VPO

2. 1948 VPO 

3. 1952 VPO 

4. 1952 VPO

5. 1954 VPO

6. 1952 VPO 

7. 1950 VPO

8. 1948 Stockholm Phil. 

9. 1951 Bayreuth

The M&A Box Set is:
3. 1944 VPO
4. 1943 BPO
5. 1943 BPO
6. 1943 BPO
7. 1943 BPO
9. 1942 BPO

In general I don't think Furtwangler's Interpretations change much. There are little things here and there, but he doesn't change his readings in some dramatic fashion. The EMI set has the best sound quality (obviously they were from the 50's instead of 40's), but if you want a nice collection of his War Time Beethoven and Post War Beethoven, these two sets are well worth the asking price, as long as you can listen to "Historical Recordings" without crying over the imperfect sound quality.


----------



## davinci

realdealblues said:


> Just for the record. The EMI box set is:
> 1. 1952 VPO
> 
> 2. 1948 VPO
> 
> 3. 1952 VPO
> 
> 4. 1952 VPO
> 
> 5. 1954 VPO
> 
> 6. 1952 VPO
> 
> 7. 1950 VPO
> 
> 8. 1948 Stockholm Phil.
> 
> 9. 1951 Bayreuth
> 
> The M&A Box Set is:
> 3. 1944 VPO
> 4. 1943 BPO
> 5. 1943 BPO
> 6. 1943 BPO
> 7. 1943 BPO
> 9. 1942 BPO
> 
> In general I don't think Furtwangler's Interpretations change much. There are little things here and there, but he doesn't change his readings in some dramatic fashion. The EMI set has the best sound quality (obviously they were from the 50's instead of 40's), but if you want a nice collection of his War Time Beethoven and Post War Beethoven, these two sets are well worth the asking price, as long as you can listen to "Historical Recordings" without crying over the imperfect sound quality.


*realdealblues*, I think I'll go for the EMI solely based on sound quality. Thanks for providing me with some first-hand knowledge.


----------



## realdealblues

davinci said:


> *realdealblues*, I think I'll go for the EMI solely based on sound quality. Thanks for providing me with some first-hand knowledge.


No problem. Happy to help if I can.


----------



## DavidA

DrMike said:


> I don't know if this is the one in that box set from EMI, but this is the one that I have, and enjoy greatly - the 9th symphony recorded in 1951 at Bayreuth.
> View attachment 12263


I have that performance in a different pressing. I must confess that I never quite see why people rave about it so much.


----------



## jtbell

My first set was Szell's, way back when I was in high school around 1970, so that's the one I "imprinted" on and still turn to first. You'll probably have to piece it together from individual CDs (Sony Essential Classics) unless you want to pay the collector's-level price for the "Original Jacket" reissue from 2004.

I have Gardiner, Vänskä and Furtwängler which have been mentioned already, and which are all good sets, although for different reasons.

I also have Klemperer who I don't think has been mentioned yet. I remember being impressed with it when I first bought that set about ten years ago and listened to it during a long car trip. Slow and granitic, unlike my usual preference for brisk readings like Szell and Gardiner, but nevertheless I enjoyed it. Now that I'm thinking about it, I'll have to dig it out and listen to it again!


----------



## SalieriIsInnocent

Immerseel's HIP cycle with Anima Eterna is quite a treat. Sure, it's a smaller orchestra, but it doesn't sound small. Each symphony is personal preference. I will say, his fifth is a breath of fresh air. 

I like the sound on Immerseel's the best. You sound closer to the instruments. For modern though, I love Barernboim's cycle. 

It really depends on what you like.

The best thing I can say to do, is try several out. I don't believe any one set rules them all. Bernstein's 9th with Kurt Moll is amazing, but I really don't like the sound.


----------



## Guest

I recently acquired the Paavo Jarvi set and it is now my favorite by a mile.


----------



## tempo

Jerome said:


> I recently acquired the Paavo Jarvi set and it is now my favorite by a mile.


The only issue with the Paavo Järvi set for me is the third movement of the Ninth, which is my favourite Beethoven movement of all. Järvi doesn't quite endow the performance with enough passion for me; it sounds very laid-back. The climax of the movement should soar, but for me it doesn't in his otherwise very good cycle.


----------



## Bone

Lots of great individual recordings - Kleiber 5 and 7 and HvK 9 come to mind - but Harnoncourt is my pick for overall cycle.


----------



## SalieriIsInnocent

Oops, had a moment of senility. I was about to post what I posted months ago. Shows I didn't change my mind.


----------



## julianoq

Jerome said:


> I recently acquired the Paavo Jarvi set and it is now my favorite by a mile.


It is my favorite for some time now. Great orchestra size/playing, right tempos, attention to details. In my opinion it has the best of modern orchestra and HIP.


----------



## Baeron

I would definitely recommend you the Cycle By Paavo Järvi and the Deutches Kammerphilharmonie Bremen for its sound qualities and quality of performences !

It is separated in 5 CDs (Each symphonies paired with another one except for the Ninth) But it is really worthing it


----------



## DavidA

In any complete cycle that is any good there are always ups and downs.
For example, HvK in 1963 where the 6Th was made under rather tense conditions and sounds it. I've therefore bought his 6th from 1977 (cheap) which is a bit more relaxed. Also supplemented the 1963 cycle with 3, 7, 9 from 1977. The rest are as good if not better in 1963. You can get the supplements very cheap from Amazon.


----------



## Centropolis

davinci said:


> Another modern-day cycle worth checking out is Barenboim/Staatskapelle Berlin, 1999. It is a slow interpretation, similiar to Furtwangler or Klemperer, but the sonics are outstanding. Released on Warner Classics, it was engineered by Teldec and you can't get better than that IMO. The mic'ing techniques reveal a great presence of the hall and the size of the orchestra.
> Barenboim goes with the traditional layout with 2nd violins on the right side: cello and bass on left. And it's a big sound; not everybody's cup of tea, but the sound is as good as it gets on Redbook.


Sorry to resurrect this thread but I was looking for the recommended Barenboim/Staatskapelle Berlin cycle on Amazon and found one released by Teldec and other by Warner Classics. Are they the same recording or did Barenboim recorded the cycle more than once with the same orchestra?

http://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-Nin...r=1-1&keywords=beethoven+symphonies+barenboim

and

http://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-Sym...r=1-3&keywords=beethoven+symphonies+barenboim


----------



## realdealblues

Centropolis said:


> Sorry to resurrect this thread but I was looking for the recommended Barenboim/Staatskapelle Berlin cycle on Amazon and found one released by Teldec and other by Warner Classics. Are they the same recording or did Barenboim recorded the cycle more than once with the same orchestra?
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-Nin...r=1-1&keywords=beethoven+symphonies+barenboim
> 
> and
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-Sym...r=1-3&keywords=beethoven+symphonies+barenboim


Yes, those are the same recordings. I think Warner owns Teldec now so the Warner one is the new Re-Release. Barenboim did record the 9 Symphonies again but with a different orchestra and that set has not been as well received as his first cycle (this one).


----------



## chrisco97

My favourite Beethoven symphony cycle is Jos van Immerseel's with the Anima Eterna. The sound is great and so are the performances. For me, anyways. I know some people are not fond of HIP performances.

http://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-Sym...6&sr=8-2&keywords=Jos+Van+Immerseel+Beethoven


----------



## Granate

*What's your opinion?*

Happy that I found this thread ON GOOGLE. I want to do a serious Beethoven Symphonies challenge to find a single of couple of complete boxes that are worth it. My first challenge didn't give definitive results. What is your opinion, should I include any other?

*Challenge No.1 2016*
Abbado BPO
Celibidache MPO
Gardiner OReR
Järvi DKPO
Karajan PO
Szell ClO
Tennstedt LPO (various labels)

*List for 2017/2018 Challenge:*
Ansermet OSR
Barenboim SKB
Bernstein WPO
Blomstedt SKD
Böhm WPO
Brüggen 18thC
Cluytens BPO
Furtwängler WPO+BFO
Hogwood AAM
Jochum BPO-SOdBR
Jochum RCO
Jochum LSO
Karajan BPO 1960s
Karajan BPO 1980s
Kempe MPO
Klemperer PO
Kubelík VarOrch
Schmidt-Isserstedt WPO
Toscanini NBC 1939
Toscanini NBC 1953
Wand SOdNDR

*Spare recordings:*
Kleiber WPO 5&7
Solti CSO 9

*Should I consider...?*
Abbado WPO
Bernstein NYPO
Davis SKD
Haitink RCO
Haitink LSO
Harnoncourt ChOE
Jansons SOdBR
Kobayashi CzPO
Kletzki CzPO
Krips LSO
Leinsdorf BSO
Reiner CSO
Solti CSO
Thielemann WPO
Walter ClSO

There are a lot of new members here since 2013. So what's your view on these recordings?
By the way, I still use the same question as the OP. 
And one more detail: I'm not very keen on HIP for Beethoven, though Hogwood and Brüggen are on the list.


----------



## Templeton

Granate said:


> Happy that I found this thread ON GOOGLE. I want to do a serious Beethoven Symphonies challenge to find a single of couple of complete boxes that are worth it. My first challenge didn't give definitive results. What is your opinion, should I include any other?


You might want to consider Pierre Monteux with the LSO, VPO and RCO. It's a wonderful cycle from one of the all-time greats.


----------



## bharbeke

Sets that I would listen to:

Morris/LSO
Barenboim/West-Eastern Divan Orchestra
Garinder/Orchestre Revolutionnaire et Romantique (looks like it was already done in 2016)
Haitink/RCO
Thielemann/WPO (assuming you spell it as Wiener instead of Vienna)
Karajan/BPO (I'm not sure which set of the two I've heard)


----------



## Granate

bharbeke said:


> Sets that I would listen to:
> ...
> Thielemann/WPO (assuming you spell it as Wiener instead of Vienna)


Yes, I always put the orchestras in their native language (except the Polish and Japanese ones, sorry).

Any reasons for Haitink RCO? It's Digital and I'm sceptical.

Gardiner OReR has a good Beethoven set. I put the No.1, No.5, No.6 and No.9 as excellent.


----------



## Mal

KenOC said:


> Bruno Walter's set of Beethoven symphonies with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra is available (download only) in fantastic Sony remasters --for nine bucks! His symphonies #2 and #4 are hard to beat, and the Pastoral -- well, it's simply the finest performance of the stereo era. Trust me on this!


It's also available in a CD box set. I totally agree with your estimation of 2, 4, and 6. But I would add 8 to the "first rate" category. I thought Karajan '63 excelled in the odd numbered symphonies; Walter neatly complemented him by doing a standout job in the even symphonies.

I listened to the Harnoncourt set and thought it was very good in most symphonies, (much better than Zinman...) But I don't think I need to own the set as I have both Walter and Karajan '63. I would always prefer listening to one or the other instead of Harnoncourt, or anyone else, at least for now and the next few years!

I've listened to a few other in their best efforts (Bohm in 6, Kleiber in 5,...) but still prefer Water and Karajan '63


----------



## Mal

bharbeke said:


> Karajan/BPO (I'm not sure which set of the two I've heard)


There are three DG, and one with the Philharmonia.


----------



## bharbeke

Re: Haitink/RCO, I liked his No. 6, and I generally hold his work in very high esteem.


----------



## Merl

Granate said:


> Happy that I found this thread ON GOOGLE. I want to do a serious Beethoven Symphonies challenge to find a single of couple of complete boxes that are worth it.
> 
> *Should I consider...?*
> Abbado WPO
> Bernstein NYPO
> Davis SKD
> Haitink RCO
> Haitink LSO
> Harnoncourt ChOE
> Jansons SOdBR
> Kobayashi CzPO
> Kletzki CzPO
> Krips LSO
> Leinsdorf BSO
> Reiner CSO
> Solti CSO
> Thielemann WPO
> Walter ClSO
> 
> There are a lot of new members here since 2013. So what's your view on these recordings?
> By the way, I still use the same question as the OP.
> And one more detail: I'm not very keen on HIP for Beethoven, though Hogwood and Brüggen are on the list.


My opinion on these is as follows:

Abbado WPO - Decent set but not as good as his BPO accounts.
Bernstein NYPO - Most people know I'm not mad on Bernstein and find both his Beethoven sets tedious
Davis SKD - Big band Beethoven with a great sound. A very good library set
Haitink RCO - Decent set but his LSO Live accounts are much better IMO (really like his 4th, 8th and 9th from the LSO set)
Haitink LSO (see above)
Harnoncourt ChOE - 4th, 5th and 6th are the best from the set. The rest is good but no better.
Jansons SOdBR - Very elegant accounts with lovely playing. Not the most exciting set but beautiful (especially the 6th)
Kobayashi CzPO - Just finished listening to this and it's actually a very rewarding, if a little schizophrienic. Kobayashi does the odd-numbered symphonies very well. The CPO are just wonderful.
Kletzki CzPO - Classy and dignified. Kletzki brings out the inner detail brilliantly but he's no speed merchant. More wonderful playing from the CPO (even if it is a generation away from Kobayashi)
Krips LSO - Never one of my favourite cycles. Nothing exciting or even noteworthy.
Leinsdorf BSO - Mid-paced but the BSO are supreme. The 9th is one of my favourite 9ths on record. Ive always liked this set even if Leinsdorf gets a mauling from some people on CM forums.
Reiner CSO - Terrible 5th but great 7th. Mixed bag.
Solti CSO - Another who comes alive in the odd-numbered symphonies but to be honest there's no bad performance here and the 9th is electric.
Thielemann WPO - Solid but unspectacular. Not one I return to often
Walter ClSO - Yawn. Possibly one of my most hated cycles. Apart from a nice 6th I find the whole cycle as dull as dishwater and ponderously slow (see also Furtwangler)

Granate, if you wanna add some serious contenders to the Beethoven challenge then throw some of thes einto the mix:

Rattle BPO
Wand NDRS
Maag OdP
Kubelik (various orchestras)
Tremblay OdlF
Norrington SWR
Dohnanyi ClO
Vanska
Fischer RCO
Mackerras - both his SCO and RLPO cycles
Albrecht CPO

I think, on last count, I had 108 complete or almost complete Beethoven cycles. There's still about another 20 I need to collect. I thought there was less but I keep finding more.

PS. Ignore my orchestra abbreviations. I was rushing.


----------



## davinci

Granate said:


> Happy that I found this thread ON GOOGLE. I want to do a serious Beethoven Symphonies challenge to find a single of couple of complete boxes that are worth it. My first challenge didn't give definitive results. What is your opinion, should I include any other?
> 
> *Spare recordings:*
> Kleiber WPO 5&7
> Solti CSO 9
> 
> *Should I consider...?*
> Abbado WPO
> Bernstein NYPO
> Davis SKD
> Haitink RCO
> Haitink LSO
> Harnoncourt ChOE
> Jansons SOdBR
> Kobayashi CzPO
> Kletzki CzPO
> Krips LSO
> Leinsdorf BSO
> Reiner CSO
> Solti CSO
> Thielemann WPO
> Walter ClSO
> 
> There are a lot of new members here since 2013. So what's your view on these recordings?
> By the way, I still use the same question as the OP.
> And one more detail: I'm not very keen on HIP for Beethoven, though Hogwood and Brüggen are on the list.


FOR SINGLE RELEASES:
Kleiber WPO 5&7
James Levine, MET, #3
Leibowitz RPO, All are good.

FOR CYCLES:
Szell, Cleveland...one of the greatest.
Harnoncourt ChOE
Karajan 1963 SACD REMASTER
Barenboim, Staatskapelle Berlin
Vänskä, Minnestota


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

I had to make myself stop on Beethoven cycles. Enough already!

Cheapie downloads I don't listen to often:
Liebowitz
Morris
Krips

CD's I should give away:
Bernstein recordings from the 60's. With the exception of a fantastic 6th, it is pretty unremarkable and a 9th I couldn't get all the way through.

Others with enough good spots to keep but I would also give away to someone who might like them:

Walter (mp3)- sound gets dull in places. Performance dull in places but also quite good other places.
Kletzki (mp3)- good strings. 6th and 9th don't do it for me. Other random places that lose me.
Gardiner (CD)- only hip. All around acceptable. Nothing exceptional. Not a very full sound overall. But OK. 

The ones I keep returning to:

Blomstedt (mp3) - nothing wrong with it. Solid all the way through. Good sound for an old recording. 
Szell (CD)- Same as above. Sometimes exceptional. 
Cluytens (CD) - Same. When I listen to this one I always wonder why I don't listen more often. 
Barenboim (CD 1999) - most recent recording. Best sounding from a sound perspective. Fine performance. 

I've tried a ton more cycles. Given away or sold many. In the future, if it isn't in some way better than what I already have, then I'll pass on it.


----------



## Merl

I just collect them. Can't help myself. Dudamels cycle will be next. I like his 7th but not his 5th, already.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

I'm not a fan of complete cycles, but my preference would probably be either the 70s Karajan BPO or the Bernstein VPO.

I prefer to mix and match:

1 & 4 - Karajan '77
2 & 8 - Norrington
3 - Klemperer '61
5 & 7 - C. Kleiber
6 - Bohm
9 - Bernstein VPO

That's pretty much a perfect Beethoven set in good sound.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Templeton said:


> You might want to consider Pierre Monteux with the LSO, VPO and RCO. It's a wonderful cycle from one of the all-time greats.


And until recently, it had to be purchased piecemeal in three separate sets, but since a year or so ago they released a nice complete set. One of my favorite Beethoven cycles too!

Check out the back cover for the track listing.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Normally I wouldn't think of mentioning Furtwangler in a thread like this due to the sound concerns, but this set is an exception. This inexpensive Andromeda set gathered together the best combination of the best Furtwangler performances in good sound. I listed to it yesterday, and the transfers are excellent. They are arguably the greatest performances of these works you will ever hear, much better than the Warner/EMI Furtwangler set. Only the 2nd is in substandard sound due to this being the only Furtwangler recording of the work we have.

Furtwangler admirers should supplement this with the wartime Music & Arts set - the wartime 9th is incomparable for its intensity - but for anyone interested in Beethoven this set is a must IMO. The sound quality of the 5th in particular is astounding.


----------



## Heck148

Not really too big on complete symphony cycles, with a few exceptions...for Beethoven, I prefer to go with individual discs...I have the Toscanini/NBC complete Symphonies...
Reiner's recorded all LvB symphonies, but the recordings come from several different sources -

1,3,5,6,7,9 are commercial releases - wonderful - great 3,5 6,9, 1....top level for me...7 is good, but I like his '54 video version for WGN-TV better [on DVD]...
#2 he recorded with PittsburghSO, very fine, and again, for WGN with CSO, maybe slightly better.
#4 and #8 are from live broadcasts of concerts for WBAI, 
These are superb.
Reiner was a great Beethoven conductor - I only wish that he had left a recording of Leonore Ov #3....


----------



## Judith

Just bought my third Beethoven Cycle

Riccardo Muti
Philadelphia Orchestra

Love Muti's other performances so I had confidence when buying this one and I was right.

My other two are

Vienna Phiharmonic Simon Rattle
Chamber Orchestra of Europe Nikolaus Harnoncourt


----------



## wkasimer

Barenboim's cycle with the Berlin Staatskapelle features superb sonics, and the performances are excellent.

For HIP, both Krivine and Paavo Järvi sound great, if you don't mind "in your face" sound

If I recall correctly, the Schmidt-Isserstedt/VPO set sounded terrific, but it's hard to find (I think that there's a Japanese issue that currrently in print).


----------



## DavidA

davinci said:


> I have quite a few Chailly recordings...wasn't aware of his Beethoven. I see the box set is very expensive. How would you describe his Beethoven; I know that is subjective, but please try.


Far to fast. Disappointing set. As if speed is everything


----------



## DavidA

For me the best cycle is Karajan 1963 but you do need to supplement the Pastoral with 1977.

Also don't miss C Kleiber in dos 5 and 7


----------



## Guest

I second the opinion of DavidA. It is like sightseeing in a racecar .


----------



## realdealblues

DavidA said:


> Far to fast. Disappointing set. As if speed is everything


I'll have to disagree. If you want to hear Beethoven based on his Metronome Markings there is absolutely no finer set. The playing of the Gewandhaus Orchestra is absolutely virtuosic! Chailly takes his cues in my mind from from Toscanini and Szell. The rhythms are tight, the playing razor sharp, the dynamics and orchestra are perfectly balanced. They are fast, because the metronome markings are fast.

Jarvi and Zinman try to play to the markings as well but Jarvi often doesn't balance the orchestra near as well and sounds puny and anemic in the 5th, 6th and 9th. Zinman sounds choppy with absolutely no sense of rhythm and always sounds rushed where Chailly never does.

It is fast and it's not for everyone, but the playing is gorgeous and magnificent and it's always my 1st choice if I want to hear Beethoven based on the metronome markings.


----------



## Guest

The metronome marks are disputabel

Frans Brüggen about the metronome marks.

"Beethoven's tempo forms a story apart. Beethoven dictated the metronome figures for the first eight symphonies to his cousin Karl. Beethoven then sat on his Hameerklavier, his cousin in a corner of the room with a pencil and a writing book. Beethoven played a number of bars, maybe several times after each other, and then shouted: "Karl, this is it!" The metronome was on the Hammerflügel and Karl carefully recorded that metronome rating.
It seems easier than it is. At least, there are several theories. The first is the most obvious: Karl has made a number of mistakes, for example a quarter note noted instead of half a note. That kind of apertured mistakes. Another theory is that the metronome of the confused, very hard-hearing Beethoven was piece. I can not believe that: a metronome is either broken or broken, there's nothing left in it. He does, or he does not. No less curious is the theory that Beethoven, still in a wardy state, wrongly read the block on the bar, which has given Karl to the bottom and top and the number at the bottom. It can, but it does not matter in practice.


----------



## Pugg

DavidA said:


> For me the best cycle is Karajan 1963 but you do need to supplement the Pastoral with 1977.
> 
> Also don't miss C Kleiber in dos 5 and 7


The new LP release are sounding stunning.


----------



## DavidA

realdealblues said:


> I'll have to disagree. If you want to hear Beethoven based on his Metronome Markings there is absolutely no finer set. The playing of the Gewandhaus Orchestra is absolutely virtuosic! Chailly takes his cues in my mind from from Toscanini and Szell. The rhythms are tight, the playing razor sharp, the dynamics and orchestra are perfectly balanced. They are fast, because the metronome markings are fast.
> 
> Jarvi and Zinman try to play to the markings as well but Jarvi often doesn't balance the orchestra near as well and sounds puny and anemic in the 5th, 6th and 9th. Zinman sounds choppy with absolutely no sense of rhythm and always sounds rushed where Chailly never does.
> 
> It is fast and it's not for everyone, but the playing is gorgeous and magnificent and it's always my 1st choice if I want to hear Beethoven based on the metronome markings.


Yes it's what LvB put in his metronome marks but the question is do they work? His mark for the hammerklavier is so fast no-one can play it at that speed. In fact, Beethoven's metronome marks are often absurdly fast. Chailly achieves them with magnificent playing. Do they sound right? No.


----------



## realdealblues

Traverso said:


> The metronome marks are disputabel
> 
> Frans Brüggen about the metronome marks.
> 
> "Beethoven's tempo forms a story apart. Beethoven dictated the metronome figures for the first eight symphonies to his cousin Karl. Beethoven then sat on his Hameerklavier, his cousin in a corner of the room with a pencil and a writing book. Beethoven played a number of bars, maybe several times after each other, and then shouted: "Karl, this is it!" The metronome was on the Hammerflügel and Karl carefully recorded that metronome rating.
> It seems easier than it is. At least, there are several theories. The first is the most obvious: Karl has made a number of mistakes, for example a quarter note noted instead of half a note. That kind of apertured mistakes. Another theory is that the metronome of the confused, very hard-hearing Beethoven was piece. I can not believe that: a metronome is either broken or broken, there's nothing left in it. He does, or he does not. No less curious is the theory that Beethoven, still in a wardy state, wrongly read the block on the bar, which has given Karl to the bottom and top and the number at the bottom. It can, but it does not matter in practice.


They will always be disputed, but in the end we weren't there. I don't believe his metronome was faulty. It certainly could have been human error but the point is we will never know. I accept that there is a possibility that they are correct and maybe we have the "wrong thinking" of believing that we know better because it doesn't sound correct to us. I'm open to both general and broad tempos as well as metronome marking tempos which is why I love Klemperer on one end and Chailly on the other. Both work for me which is only a testament to how strong the works themselves are in my opinion.


----------



## realdealblues

DavidA said:


> Yes it's what LvB put in his metronome marks but the question is do they work? His mark for the hammerklavier is so fast no-one can play it at that speed. In fact, Beethoven's metronome marks are often absurdly fast. Chailly achieves them with magnificent playing. Do they sound right? No.


Do they work? I think they do. I think both styles work. From the slow granite approach from Klemperer to the blazing tightness of Chailly, I think both are valid.

Do they sound right? Perhaps not to you, perhaps not to me, but perhaps to someone else they do. That's entirely up to the listener to decide for themselves. I still find Gunter Wand to be the best of all cycles with every tempo perfectly judged. They sound best to my ears but I still can enjoy Klemperer on one end of the spectrum or Chailly on the other. Even though it may be a small chance that the metronome markings are correct, I still leave the possibility open and Chailly's cycle is damn exciting and amazing to hear just for the playing alone. Beethoven works for me on many different levels and as I've said before, I find that his works can work at pretty much any tempo in the hands of the right interpreter because they are so strongly written to begin with.


----------



## Granate

*Beethoven Challenge Draw*

Thank you to everyone for all the answers, especially to *Merl* for the rare list of recommendable Beethoven sets. I've listed a ton of cycles to listen after the R. Strauss Challenge I'm currently into.

About the Chailly set, I've listened to some excerpts and the LGO sounds superb with the fast tempi. I have to side with realdealblues with this one, before actually listening to the sets.

I want to fix the mistakes I made organising the Bruckner Challenge. I don't want to feel exhausted or think that all recordings of a symphony sound the same. That is why I'm dividing the challenge in three parts depending on the Orchestra's country and style (modern stereo, mono or HIP). The three basic groups are: Germany; Rest of Europe + HIP; Mono recordings + USA.


*Conductor**Orchestra**Release**G*Abbado, ClaudioBerliner Philharmoniker2008, DG3Ansermet, ErnestOrchestre de la Suisse Romande1964, Decca2Barenboim, DanielStaatskapelle Berlin1999, WC1Bernstein, LeonardWiener Philharmoniker1978, DG2Blomstedt, HerbertStaatskapelle Dresden1980, Brilliant3Böhm, KarlWiener Philharmoniker1972, DG2Brüggen, FransOrchestra of the 18th Century1994, Philips2Chailly, RiccardoLeipzig Gewandhausorchester2011, Decca3Cluytens, AndréBerliner Philharmoniker1960, Erato3Davis, ColinStaatskapelle Dresden1995, Philips3Dudamel, GustavoOrquesta Sinfónica Simón Bolívar2017, G.D.1Furtwängler, WilhelmWiener Philharmonker, etc.1953, WC1Gardiner, John EliotOrch. Révolutionaire et Romantique1994, Archiv-DG2Giulini, Carlo MariaFilarmonica della Scala1994, Sony2Haitink, BernardLondon Symphony Orchestra2011, LSO2Harnoncourt, NikolausChamber Orchestra of Europe1991, WC2Hogwood, ChristopherThe Academy of Ancient Music1990, L'Oiseau2Jansons, MarissSO des Bayersischen Rundfunks2013, BR-Klassik3Jochum, EugenBPO + SOdBR1961, DG3Jochum, EugenConcertgebouworkest Amsterdam1969, Philips3Jochum, EugenLondon Symphony Orchestra1979, WC3Karajan, Herbert vonBerliner Philharmoniker1963, DG3Karajan, Herbert vonBerliner Philharmoniker1977, DG3Karajan, Herbert vonBerliner Philharmoniker1986, DG3Kempe, RudolfMünchner Philharmoniker1973, WC3Klemperer, OttoPhilharmonia Orchestra1961, WC2Kletzki, PaulCzech Philharmonic Orchestra1968, Supraphon2Konwitschny, FranzLeipzig Gewandhausorchester1963, Eterna3Kubelík, RafaelVarious Orchestras1976, DG1Leinsdorf, ErichBoston Symphony Orchestra1967, Sony1Monteux, PierreLSO + WPO1965, Decca2Muti, RiccardoPhiladelphia Orchestra1988, WC1Ormandy, EugenePhiladelphia Orchestra1964, Sony1Sawallisch, WolfgangConcertgeboworkest Amsterdam1993, WC1Schmidt-Isserstedt, HansWiener Philharmoniker1969, Decca2Schuricht, CarlO.S. des Concerts du Conservatoire1961, WC1Solti, GeorgChicago Symphony Orchestra1975, Decca1Solti, GeorgChicago Symphony Orchestra1990, Decca1Szell, GeorgeCleveland Orchestra1968, Sony1Thielemann, ChristianWiener Philharmoniker2011, Sony2Toscanini, ArturoNBC Symphony Orchestra1939, Andromeda1Toscanini, ArturoNBC Symphony Orchestra1953, Sony1Tremblay, Jean-PhilippeOrchestre de la Francophonie2009, Anakleta2Vänskä, OsmoMinnesota Orchestra2009, BIS1Walter, BrunoColumbia Symphony Orchestra1963, Sony1Wand, GünterNDR Sinfonieorchester1989, Sony3Weil, BrunoTafelmusik Baroque Orchestra2017, Anakleta2Weingartner, FelixRPO + WPO1938, Naxos1

Adding some individual performances


*Conductor**Symphonies**Orchestra**Released**G*Doráti, AntalNos.5,6,7London Symphony Orchestra1963, Mercury2Fricsay, FerencNos.1,3,5,7,8,9Berliner Philharmoniker1959, DG3Furtwängler, WilhelmNos.3,4,5,6,7,9BPO+WPO1944, M&A1Giulini, Carlo MariaNos.3,5,6,9LAPO+BPO1982, DG2Giulini, Carlo MariaNos.6,8,9LSO+NPO1974, WC2Kleiber, CarlosNo.5, No.7Wiener Philharmoniker1976, DG2Tennstedt, KlausNos.3,6,8London Philharmonic Orchestra1987, WC2Tennstedt, KlausNos.5,6,9London Philharmonic Orchestra1992, LPO2

I know I may be leaving some out, but I find no way to stream them. My goal is to qualify as references a couple of sets per group. Like:


Best HIP
Best Mono
Best SQ
Best Fast Tempi
Best Slow Tempi
Etc.

Edit, due to some excerpts, I take out the Krips cycle and put in the new Bruno Weil cycle.


----------



## realdealblues

Lots of good listening ahead for you...I still revisit many of those cycles on a regular basis.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Granate said:


> Thank you to everyone for all the answers, especially to *Merl* for the rare list of recommendable Beethoven sets. I've listed a ton of cycles to listen after the R. Strauss Challenge I'm currently into.
> 
> About the Chailly set, I've listened to some excerpts and the LGO sounds superb with the fast tempi. I have to side with realdealblues with this one, before actually listening to the sets.
> 
> I want to fix the mistakes I made organising the Bruckner Challenge. I don't want to feel exhausted or think that all recordings of a symphony sound the same. That is why I'm dividing the challenge in three parts depending on the Orchestra's country and style (modern stereo, mono or HIP). The three basic groups are: Germany; Rest of Europe + HIP; Mono recordings + USA.
> 
> 
> *Conductor**Orchestra**Release**G*Abbado, ClaudioBerliner Philharmoniker2008, DG3Ansermet, ErnestOrchestre de la Suisse Romande1964, Decca2Barenboim, DanielStaatskapelle Berlin1999, WC1Bernstein, LeonardWiener Philharmoniker1978, DG2Blomstedt, HerbertStaatskapelle Dresden1980, Brilliant3Böhm, KarlWiener Philharmoniker1972, DG2Brüggen, FransOrchestra of the 18th Century1994, Philips2Chailly, RiccardoLeipzig Gewandhausorchester2011, Decca3Cluytens, AndréBerliner Philharmoniker1960, Erato3Davis, ColinStaatskapelle Dresden1995, Philips3Dudamel, GustavoOrquesta Sinfónica Simón Bolívar2017, G.D.1Furtwängler, WilhelmWiener Philharmonker, etc.1953, WC1Gardiner, John EliotOrch. Révolutionaire et Romantique1994, Archiv-DG2Giulini, Carlo MariaFilarmonica della Scala1994, Sony2Haitink, BernardLondon Symphony Orchestra2011, LSO2Harnoncourt, NikolausChamber Orchestra of Europe1991, WC2Hogwood, ChristopherThe Academy of Ancient Music1990, L'Oiseau2Jansons, MarissSO des Bayersischen Rundfunks2013, BR-Klassik3Jochum, EugenBPO + SOdBR1961, DG3Jochum, EugenConcertgebouworkest Amsterdam1969, Philips3Jochum, EugenLondon Symphony Orchestra1979, WC3Karajan, Herbert vonBerliner Philharmoniker1963, DG3Karajan, Herbert vonBerliner Philharmoniker1977, DG3Karajan, Herbert vonBerliner Philharmoniker1986, DG3Kempe, RudolfMünchner Philharmoniker1973, WC3Klemperer, OttoPhilharmonia Orchestra1961, WC2Kletzki, PaulCzech Philharmonic Orchestra1968, Supraphon2Konwitschny, FranzLeipzig Gewandhausorchester1963, Eterna3Krips, JosefLondon Symphony Orchestra1959, Everest2Kubelík, RafaelVarious Orchestras1976, DG1Leinsdorf, ErichBoston Symphony Orchestra1967, Sony1Monteux, PierreLSO + WPO1965, Decca2Muti, RiccardoPhiladelphia Orchestra1988, WC1Ormandy, EugenePhiladelphia Orchestra1964, Sony1Sawallisch, WolfgangConcertgeboworkest Amsterdam1993, WC1Schmidt-Isserstedt, HansWiener Philharmoniker1969, Decca2Schuricht, CarlO.S. des Concerts du Conservatoire1961, WC1Solti, GeorgChicago Symphony Orchestra1975, Decca1Solti, GeorgChicago Symphony Orchestra1990, Decca1Szell, GeorgeCleveland Orchestra1968, Sony1Thielemann, ChristianWiener Philharmoniker2011, Sony2Toscanini, ArturoNBC Symphony Orchestra1939, Andromeda1Toscanini, ArturoNBC Symphony Orchestra1953, Sony1Tremblay, Jean-PhilippeOrchestre de la Francophonie2009, Anakleta2Vänskä, OsmoMinnesota Orchestra2009, BIS1Walter, BrunoColumbia Symphony Orchestra1963, Sony1Wand, GünterNDR Sinfonieorchester1989, Sony3Weingartner, FelixRPO + WPO1938, Naxos1
> 
> Adding some individual performances
> 
> 
> *Conductor**Symphonies**Orchestra**Released**G*Fricsay, FerencNos.1,3,5,7,8,9Berliner Philharmoniker1959, DG3Furtwängler, WilhelmNos.3,4,5,6,7,9BPO+WPO1944, M&A1Giulini, Carlo MariaNos.3,5,6,9LAPO+BPO1982, DG2Giulini, Carlo MariaNos.6,8,9LSO+NPO1974, WC2Kleiber, CarlosNo.5, No.7Wiener Philharmoniker1976, DG2Tennstedt, KlausNos.3,6,8London Philharmonic Orchestra1987, WC2Tennstedt, KlausNos.5,6,9London Philharmonic Orchestra1992, LPO2
> 
> I know I may be leaving some out, but I find no way to stream them. My goal is to qualify as references a couple of sets per group. Like:
> 
> 
> Best HIP
> Best Mono
> Best SQ
> Best Fast Tempi
> Best Slow Tempi
> Etc.


Great list! But don't forget the Andromeda live post-war Furtwangler set which I posted on the previous page. It is on itunes.


----------



## Merl

Thanks for the heads-up, Granate. As a Beethoven symphony nerd, I'm really looking forward to your Beethoven Challenge.
As regards tempi of Beethoven performances, I love allsorts of performances, from the slow but beautifully expansive Asahina accounts to mid-paced Blomstedt and right up to speed merchants like Chailly. Personally I don't care about the metronome markings. A great Beethoven performance is great due to the quality of the account, not the speed. I totally agree with Realdealblues that the Chailly set is exemplary. The playing is gorgeous and most performances sound natural and exciting. However, slower accounts can also provide excitement and drama too. I can happy listen to Bohm's deliberate and wonderful Pastoral and Scherchen's rip-roaring motorbike-ride through the countryside and still love both. I can admire Jansons' landscaped approach to the symphonies and the fire of Solti. Both are acceptable, relevant and admirable. I used to find Klemperer way too slow for me in Beethoven but the readings are so committed I've warmed to them over the years. However Celi"s accounts are just taking the p*ss! Last week I was listening to, and enjoying, Blomstedt's tough germanic 7th with the Dresden Staatskapellle and this week I've been really loving Dudamel's speedy, exciting 7th with the Bolivars. Both have their particular merits and both are great performances but very different.


----------



## Granate

Merl said:


> [...] I used to find Klemperer way too slow for me in Beethoven but the readings are so committed I've warmed to them over the years. However Celi"s accounts are just taking the p*ss! Last week I was listening to, and enjoying, Blomstedt's tough germanic 7th with the Dresden Staatskapellle and this week I've been really loving Dudamel's speedy, exciting 7th with the Bolivars. Both have their particular merits and both are great performances but very different.


Celibidache, and also Järvi are the only ones of 2016 that I have not listed. Järvi is brilliant in No.5, but the rest of the cycle is very brisk in the playing. Celibidache plays a great No.8 and an out-of-this-world 'Eroica', which can be considered a happy accident compared to his pedestrian, overexplanatory accounts with the MPO. However, I have included again, and against my personal will, the Abbado BPO. But I will gladly disdain every bar of his dreary cycle so I can see it very low in the "Germany" group. I heard a snippet of the Pastoral Third movement and reminded me of the general trend of his ********** ****** set.


----------



## Granate

This is taken from the last episode of the first Beethoven Challenge back in October 2016:



Granate said:


> *Final scores:*
> 1st. Furtwängler: 50p (6-6-4-4-2-8-7-5-8)
> 2nd. Gardiner: 49p (7-4-6-6-5-7-5-2-7)
> 3rd. Tennstedt: 46p (8-0-7-0-8-6-8-4-5)
> 4th. Szell: 44p (5-7-2-8-4-5-6-3-4)
> 5th. Karajan PO: 43p (3-8-5-5-3-2-4-7-6)
> 6th. Celibidache: 35p(1-2-8-7-1-3-3-8-2)
> 7th. Järvi: 30p (4-3-1-2-7-4-2-6-1)
> 8th. Abbado BPO: 25p (2-5-3-3-6-1-1-1-3)
> 
> *Final selection:*
> *No.1:* Tennstedt LPO; Gardiner OReR
> *No.2:* Karajan PO
> *No.3:* Celibidache MPO; Tennstedt LPO
> *No.4:* Szell ClO................... Celibidache MPO
> *No.5:* Tennstedt LPO
> *No.6:* Furtwängler WPO; Gardiner OReR
> *No.7:* Tennstedt LPO; Furtwängler WPO
> *No.8:* Celibidache MPO: Karajan PO
> *No.9:* Fricsay BPO; Furtwängler BPO 1942..... Gardiner OReR; Karajan PO
> 
> *Final thoughts:*
> Even a huge amount of conductors have recorded the famous nine Beethoven symphonies, I selected 8 cycles (+ additional War recordings for Furtwängler), of which I only regret trying Abbado's BPO last account and Järvi's "experiments". I would not say that the Philharmonia cycle with Karajan is bad but with comparisons it looks weak some times. Celibidache is still a "Hit and miss" for me. I think Szell's cycle is good but too "Old School" for my taste.
> 
> Then the three majors of this challenge: I would like to start with *Gardiner* because I strongly reccomend to listen his HIP cycle, a totally immersing experience like any other. Some times it does not fit really well, but the execution is almost brilliant every time. *Furtwängler*, on the other hand, has earned a tight 1st place because of being constant (the 1942 war No.9 led him to victory). He is really good, but scarcely manages to get the top spot against other different conductors.
> 
> *Tennstedt* should have recorded all the symphonies with EMI at his time, or live with the BBC. He is a superb Beethoven conductor (BBC engineering has helped his recordings a great deal). Almost everything he touches is made into Gold. The No.8 he recorded with EMI is not consistent enough. The last No.9 is really good, and the rest are masterpieces. He should be the winner.
> 
> *Symphonies:*
> In gold I marked the ones I was most satisfied about, precisely Celibidache's extraterrestrial Eroica, Szell's visionary Adagio in No.4, and legendary accounts of Fricsay (clarity) and Furtwängler (drumming, noise and hope) in their recordings with the BPO.


----------



## Merl

Granate said:


> This is taken from the last episode of the first Beethoven Challenge back in October 2016:
> 
> Final selection:
> No.1: Tennstedt LPO; Gardiner OReR
> No.2: Karajan PO
> No.3: Celibidache MPO; Tennstedt LPO
> No.4: Szell ClO................... Celibidache MPO
> No.5: Tennstedt LPO
> No.6: Furtwängler WPO; Gardiner OReR
> No.7: Tennstedt LPO; Furtwängler WPO
> No.8: Celibidache MPO: Karajan PO
> No.9: Fricsay BPO; Furtwängler BPO 1942..... Gardiner OReR; Karajan PO


I may disagree with you on some of these, Granate. Lol. :lol: Incidentally, I'm just sampling De Vriend's and Weil's cycles and there's some very interesting recordings here. The Dudamel set is interesting too but I've only heard a bit of that too.


----------



## Granate

Merl said:


> I may disagree with you on some of these, Granate. Lol. Incidentally, I'm just sampling De Vriend's and Weil's cycles and there's some very interesting recordings here. The Dudamel set is interesting too but I've only heard a bit of that too.


No worries, I only surveyed a few cycles, I found on Google some of your Pastoral reccomendations back in October 2016. Think that I'm going to start with a clean sheet. Did Ashkenazy deliver such a great No.6?


----------



## hpowders

The Abbado and Chailly sets for the combination of best sound and performance, though I would take the Wand set over either of them without any sound restrictions.


----------



## Merl

Granate said:


> No worries, I only surveyed a few cycles, I found on Google some of your Pastoral reccomendations back in October 2016. Think that I'm going to start with a clean sheet. Did Ashkenazy deliver such a great No.6?


I wouldn't call Ashkenazy's Pastoral 'great' but it is a lovely reading. Very broad account (as I said I have nothing against slower readings) and very warm. Not for everyone but I may be biased as it was one of the first accounts I bought of the Pastoral. It's always had good reviews upon its various re-issues and, to my ears, it desreves it. Lyrical and loving is the way I'd describe it and the polar opposite of Chailly, Gardiner, Pletnev and Scherchen (all of which I love too).

Incidentally, I'm really enjoying the Dudamel cycle. It's had mixed reviews but there's no denying it's exciting. The last movement of the 7th is as quick and intense as I've ever heard. Thrilling stuff.


----------



## bigshot

That list makes no sense to me and I've heard almost all of those. Tennstedt is good, but he isn't a standout. And no Toscanini or Bohm? Weird results.


----------



## Granate

bigshot said:


> That list makes no sense to me and I've heard almost all of those. Tennstedt is good, but he isn't a standout. And no Toscanini or Bohm? Weird results.


Go to the previous page


----------



## Granate

hpowders said:


> The Abbado and Chailly sets for the combination of best sound and performance, though I would take the Wand set over either of them without any sound restrictions.


Talking about the Abbado Berliner set.

I just noticed that the BPO cycle I listened to in 2016 was the OOP 2000 edition, not the 2008 later reedition recorded in Rome in 2001.



Phil (not) in Magnolia said:


> Other reviewers have expressed their opinions of this collection of Claudio Abbado's recordings of Beethoven's symphonies, recorded in 2000, actually in mostly positive reviews which just goes to show you that not everyone's taste is the same.
> 
> The main purpose of my review is to make others aware that there is a newer release of the Beethoven Symphonies, also conducted by Claudio Abbado and with the Berlin Philharmonic, and available for less than half the price of this box set: Beethoven: The Symphonies, but most importantly the newer recordings were made in order to document Abbado's "final interpretative wishes" and to replace these earlier recordings made with the Berlin Philharmonic just one year earlier.
> 
> *Yes, Claudio Abbado essentially apologized for the performances released with this box set and just a single year later re-recorded them. Quite extraordinary, that.*
> 
> The newer recordings have Symphonies 1-8 recorded live in Rome in 2001 especially for that release. Symphony 9 is from the same 2000 performance as this box set, recorded live in Berlin, but re-edited to satisfy maestro Abbado's requirements.
> 
> Again, the later recordings were made in order to document Abbado's "final interpretative wishes" and to replace these earlier recordings he had made.
> 
> The Gramophone Classical Music Guide 2012 gives the newer box set a high recommendation, as does Penguin Guide 2008. That doesn't necessarily mean that the later interpretations will be the "best" for any individual listener, but it is a generally reliable indication that there is something special with the recordings and they are worth seriously considering, among the vast array of other recordings of Beethoven's symphonies available (my personal favorite being Gardiner (Beethoven: The Symphonies) but I have others as well including Karajan's Beethoven: 9 Symphonies (1963), plenty of variety to enjoy what for me are the best symphonies in the repertoire).
> 
> Again - be aware of the alternate box set which "should" be preferable, and is available for a much lower price.
> 
> Or - heck, If you for whatever reason feel that this earlier set of recordings is one that you wish to have, then know that it is no longer being produced by Deutsche Grammophon, so that price is likely to go up even further in the future.


That is why I didn't understand the love for the Abbado BPO recordings. I was just mixing up the sets.


----------



## Merl

I've been getting a bit mixed-up by Dudamel's Beethoven recordings. I already had this one, on DG with the Bolivars, and love the supercharged 7th (the 5th is ok).










Hence, when I got hold of Dudamel's complete symphony set I was surprised to see that it's a self-released Beethoven cycle and doesn't include the original traversals he did with DG (with the same orchestra). Instead Dudamel has re-imagined his original accounts of the 3rd, 5th and 7th. The result? Well if I'm being honest, it's not as good. Dudamel's complete cycle is nowhere near as thrilling as his original recordings (especially that 7th with the gripping, lightning speed finale). Is it good? Well on initial skip-thru it is a good set but there are so many good sets out there it doesn't stand out amongst the competition.I was expecting fireworks and fire and brimstone and yet this cycle is far from that. It's actually quite laid-back.










Speeds are nowhere near metronome markings for most symphonies and some are pretty broad (especially the 6th), lending to a more 70s mid-European sound. Dudamel says he's changed his readings and view of the symphonies over time and there's no doubting the orchestra play with great commitment and skill but it all lends to a better-than-good-but-not-outstanding experience. I may be being a little unfair to this at the moment but, like Thielemann's set, it's yet to set my world on fire. I'll get back to you when I've lived with it for a few weeks but for now it's not a front-runner. As far as the new Blomstedt / Gewandhaus cycle is concerned, I've given it a fortnight of my time but it's not impressed me. It's certainly nowhere near as good as the Dresden set in my estimation. Beautifully played but lacking dynamic thrust and some umph.


----------



## Napodano

Perhaps I am derailing the topic but please bear with me.

I heard the First finale towards the end from Karajan 63 and Chailly. Besides the tempo, I was surprised to notice that Chailly uses the brass (with trilling trumpets) for the close while Karajan uses the timpani. 

Is it me dreaming or is a conductor allowed to use different instruments in the piece interpretation? or is the composer giving such liberty?

BTW the pleasure of comparing interpretations is pure bliss.


----------



## Granate

^^
Are you talking about Beethoven's No.7?

Generally what you hear in a Concert of the same symphony is the same score. The differences are in the refinement and the tempi.

Please, correct me if I'm wrong.

In studio recordings, there is another element: *the producer.* Together with the conductor (at least in the case of Karajan) they decide which sound fits best the "pursuit of perfection". Then, in the master tapes the producer and engineers modify the sound mix to give more presence to certain microphones. It was very common in the Analogue era and a job that Karajan took very seriously.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

I am reconsidering my original opinion of this set. The sound is quite good for this late 80's recording. The interpretation is full and reasonably powerful. Not at all a bad set to own. I would recommend it to any new or casual listener.


----------



## Napodano

Granate said:


> ^^
> Are you talking about Beethoven's No.7?
> 
> Generally what you hear in a Concert of the same symphony is the same score. The differences are in the refinement and the tempi.
> 
> Please, correct me if I'm wrong.
> 
> In studio recordings, there is another element: *the producer.* Together with the conductor (at least in the case of Karajan) they decide which sound fits best the "pursuit of perfection". Then, in the master tapes the producer and engineers modify the sound mix to give more presence to certain microphones. It was very common in the Analogue era and a job that Karajan took very seriously.


Granate, I am talking about Beethoven's No.1. I do not remember if it was the first movement or the last. It was towards the end. I listened it at a friend's place, I cannot check again easily.

Giving more presence to certain microphone - yes it could also be, but the result in timbre sounds very different (especially the trumpet trill).


----------



## KenOC

I want to put in a word for Haitink's recent live Beethoven symphony cycle with the London Symphony Orchestra. He skinnied his forces down from previous efforts and moved somewhat toward the "HIP" end of the spectrum, with excellent results. This is a fine and very musical cycle, which I like a lot.

The downloadable version is $14 on Amazon, a real bargain.


----------



## Merl

KenOC said:


> I want to put in a word for Haitink's recent live Beethoven symphony cycle with the London Symphony Orchestra. He skinnied his forces down from previous efforts and moved somewhat toward the "HIP" end of the spectrum, with excellent results. This is a fine and very musical cycle, which I like a lot.
> 
> The downloadable version is $14 on Amazon, a real bargain.


Couldn't agree more. A superb cycle, capped by a slow-burning 9th and a terrific 4th and 7th.


----------



## gellio

I have Barenboim (don't really care for it), Karajan '63, Solti, Gardiner, and I just got the Chailly yesterday. Of the four I previously had, I liked Gardiner the best, hands down, but this Chailly is absolutely riveting. I've made it through No. 3, No. 5, No. 6 and No. 8 thus far. The finale of No. 8 - holy cow what good fun. The 1st movement of the 6th (my single favorite movement in any Beethoven Symphony) is faster than am used to, but I quite like it. All in all, thus far I'm thrilled with it. I'll leave the 9th until I can find time to really focus on that. Also listened to the 4th movement of the 2nd, which is also good fun. The orchestral playing is just so great. So great.

People have to remember that this movement to conduct Beethoven slower than intended started in what the 50s/60s? I tend to believe that Beethoven knows more about music than any conductor or any of us. So, I prefer things to be played to the composers intentions. But, I do love the different interpretations. It would be boring if everyone interpreted everything the same.


----------



## gellio

tgtr0660 said:


> Gardiner and Harnoncourt kill Beethoven.


Regarding Gardiner, how so? I find his Beethoven absolutely magnificent. One has to remember Beethoven's music was shocking when it premiered. Beethoven isn't always meant to be beautiful and smooth. Gardiner hits the nail on the head, IMO.


----------



## Judith

Have three sets but my favourite is Riccardo Muti and Philadelphia Orchestra except for symphonies 4 & 7 which I love performed by ASMF with Joshua Bell directing the orchestra.

Other two being

Simon Rattle Vienna Philharmonic 
Nikolaus Harnoncourt Chamber Orchestra of Europe


----------



## Napodano

gellio said:


> I have Barenboim (don't really care for it), Karajan '63, Solti, Gardiner, and I just got the Chailly yesterday. Of the four I previously had, I liked Gardiner the best, hands down, but this Chailly is absolutely riveting. I've made it through No. 3, No. 5, No. 6 and No. 8 thus far. The finale of No. 8 - holy cow what good fun. The 1st movement of the 6th (my single favorite movement in any Beethoven Symphony) is faster than am used to, but I quite like it. All in all, thus far I'm thrilled with it. I'll leave the 9th until I can find time to really focus on that. Also listened to the 4th movement of the 2nd, which is also good fun. The orchestral playing is just so great. So great.


Wait for the 9th. It was so urging that I had to stand up and walk in a state of bliss. Chailly and the orchestra give us drama and joy, 21st century style. And this by using the original metronome which Beethoven wanted!


----------



## Josquin13

It's so difficult to confidently recommend Beethoven cycles, as they all have their strengths and weaknesses (& besides, people have varying tastes and expectations). I actually find it more interesting to talk about the highlights (or disappointments) from the different cycles--such as Harnoncourt's 2nd and 6th, Chailly's 3rd, Hogwood's 1st and 4th, Gardiner's 7th & 9th, Immerseel's brilliant 7th!, Nelson's 8th!, etc. And, the various reasons why most of the period boys seem to fail so miserably in the 5th and 9th. Or, why the Eroica is so extremely difficult for most conductors to manage to pull off. But, if I were pressed to choose only a few cycles that offer the best combination of sound and performance, overall, I'd likely pick from the following sets:

1. On modern instruments: my choice would be between: (1) Bernard Haitink, Concertgebouw Orchestra of Amsterdam, Phillips digital (1989); (2) Eugen Jochum's newly remastered EMI set with the London Symphony Orchestra (in the Jochum ICON box set), and (3) Kurt Masur's 1st cycle with the Leipzig Gewandhaus Orchestra on the AMSI remasters from Universal Eloquence (which I slightly prefer to the Pentatone SACDs).

2. On period instruments: that's another tough choice, but it would be between (1) Frans Bruggen's 1st studio cycle on Phillips (which is better in both sound & performance from Bruggen's 2nd live cycle), (2) Gardiner's cycle on DG Archiv, and (3) Hogwood's set on L'Oiseau-Lyre. Granted, Gardiner is the only period conductor I've heard that has made a very good recording of the 9th (& Missa Solemnis), but I don't overly care for Gardiner's set otherwise (except for his 7th)--so I'd probably take Bruggen 1. Having said that, I certainly wouldn't want to be without Immerseel's 7th--which is one of my all-time favorite recordings of the 7th (as I thoroughly enjoy the sound of the original Viennese horns that Anima Eterna uses! which work perfectly with the original woodwinds & strings in this symphony).

3. HIP on modern instruments: another difficult choice: admittedly, I haven't heard all of Giovanni Antonini's recently completed cycle, including his 9th, but I'd probably lean towards John Nelson's cycle in Paris, as well Bernard Haitink's with the LSO live. Chailly's Leipzig set is good too, but it's too relentlessly driven when listened to in larger doses. Harnoncourt can also be good--such as his superb 2nd (& 6th), but he's more erratic in the other symphonies--as with his disappointing 4th & 5th. Charles MacKerras's set with the Scottish Chamber Orchestra has some exceptional qualities too, but it wouldn't be my first choice either. So, Nelson and Haitink are probably the most consistent overall. & Haitink is better in the 9th, which was one of the weak points of Nelson's cycle (i.e., the 4th choral movement).


----------



## Napodano

It is because of posts like yours, Josquin13, that I love this community so much!

Your post above is a treasure trove for me to explore for years to come. THANK YOU!

Mauro


----------



## DavidA

The Chailly has wonderful sound and the orchestral playing is superb. What I do not like are Chaiily's over-quick tempi in many places. They sound more 'hurried' than 'urgent' to me.


----------



## SixFootScowl

I think that nobody has mentioned Zinman's set. A fine cycle and fast tempo as Beethoven presumably wanted it.


----------



## tgdb9

The ORR/Gardiner set still places among my favorite recordings of anything ever. In particular I've yet to hear a recording that matches the energy of the 4th and 7th in that set.


----------



## Merl

I'd like to hear Noseda's Proms performances in better sound than the poor 128k downloads they were given in. The sound ruins the whole cycle for me. Its not a great cycle but very enjoyable, nonetheless.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

I am not a fan of complete cycles, but I have come to the conclusion that the most consistently satisfying modern version is this one. Consistently good interpretations across the board with beautiful playing from the Berlin Philharmonic.


----------



## Merl

Like many have said there are plenty of very good recordings that you can pick up fairly inexpensively. In the past year or so many complete sets have appeared regularly for under £5 (either slightly used on Amazon or Ebay or even brand new). Of these the ones below are great value.

Rattle / VPO 
Weller / CBSO (2 parts)
Zinman / Tonhalle
Edlinger & Halasz / Zagreb PO 
Karajan / BPO 85
Gielen / SWR (I picked this up last week)
Szell / Cleveland 
Mackerras / RLPO
Blomstedt / Dresden

All these are very good or better sets yet all have appeared at knockdown prices online in the past year. You wouldn't be disappointed if you received any of these. One day I'll get round to posting that list of my 106 complete (or near complete) Beethoven cycles for Johnnie B.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Complete set: the '62/'63 Karajan/Berlin

individual: #3---Cluytens/Berlin and Szell/Cleveland
#5---Karajan '63 and Solti/Vienna Phil., still my favorite 5ths 
#7---Reiner/Chicago and Bernstein/NY Phil; his '69 version, *not* the earlier '59
#9---Reiner/Chicago


----------



## Merl

I've gradually warmed to Dudamel's complete cycle. At first I was disappointed that it wasnt high octane like his DG pairings of the 5th and 7th but his revised readings have a lot more colour and inner detail. I particularly like his choices for the 4th, 6th and 8th. I've been revisiting Mackerras' RLPO cycle this week. I've gotta say I still enjoy it slightly more than his later cycle. It's a bit rough round the edges at times but the sheer enthusiasm of the music-making makes it a thoroughly enjoyable set. As Jim Prideaux will confirm i still rate Maag's cycle extremely highly. He just seems to judge tempi so well and the playing is so spirited. Not heard all of Tilson Thomas' San Francisco recordings yet but the 2nd is very impressive, the 7th is similarly solid and rewarding and the 9th is brilliant. Looking forward to hearing more from Tilson Thomas. Much better than his haphazard ECO cycle from years ago.


----------



## staxomega

I will have to add another favorite and this is Toscanini's 1939 cycle, I finally managed to find this box set on Immortal Performances which has the best sound quality of any I've heard with great detail and an open sound since the high end isn't filtered or choked by noise reduction. Of course sound quality is relative given the nature of these early recordings. 

These are not as brisk as his 50s recordings (though not slow!) and are fiery performances.


----------



## Konsgaard

Berlin Staatskapelle and Daniel Barenboim. This is hands down the best recorded set I have heard and I've heard most of them. I am referring to the recorded sound. But the performances are also among the best (if you don't mind the Furtwanglerian approach). I find both Abbado sets with the BPO of average sound quality. Chailly's sound is excellent, the performances are impressive but lacking in soul in my opinion. Wand's set with NDR (a digital set remastered in 24bit sound) offers both impressive recorded sound with really strong performances. In fact, when Gramophone magazine used to have its recordings guide, the Wand set was top choice for a Beethoven symphony set.


----------



## Paulg

It is this very subject that brought me to this forum and it has been very enlightening.

The only symphonic cycle I had ever owned up to this time was Christoph von Dohnanyi, The Cleveland Orchestra, 1989, Telarc. The disc containing the ninth had a continuous low-level hum throughout, so was unfit to play. I replaced this with a single by Lorin Maazel, The Cleveland Orchestra, 1979, CBS Masterworks.

You get used to what you have, and I always thought these works sounded good on my gear, but I was willing to go in search of a more recent work that would hold promise of being superior sonically -- as in modern recording methods, direct to digital, and so forth.

So I went for the Chailly, in part also because I was aware of the metronome markings debate and I was very curious about that. It is, to say the least, interesting. But, as someone else has remarked here, it's much like sightseeing from a race car. As I say, you get used to what you have. It's hard to have something you love changed like that. 

It isn't clear to me yet that this Chailly recording is superior to my older discs. I need to spend more time with it, perhaps. I am going to purchase another round of these works after further study of the posts in this thread. It is difficult to know what to try next. I believe that what I want is rendition to which I have become accustomed with better presence and dynamic range.


----------



## Merl

Paulg said:


> It is this very subject that brought me to this forum and it has been very enlightening.
> 
> The only symphonic cycle I had ever owned up to this time was Christoph von Dohnanyi, The Cleveland Orchestra, 1989, Telarc. The disc containing the ninth had a continuous low-level hum throughout, so was unfit to play. I replaced this with a single by Lorin Maazel, The Cleveland Orchestra, 1979, CBS Masterworks.
> 
> You get used to what you have, and I always thought these works sounded good on my gear, but I was willing to go in search of a more recent work that would hold promise of being superior sonically -- as in modern recording methods, direct to digital, and so forth.
> 
> So I went for the Chailly, in part also because I was aware of the metronome markings debate and I was very curious about that. It is, to say the least, interesting. But, as someone else has remarked here, it's much like sightseeing from a race car. As I say, you get used to what you have. It's hard to have something you love changed like that.
> 
> It isn't clear to me yet that this Chailly recording is superior to my older discs. I need to spend more time with it, perhaps. I am going to purchase another round of these works after further study of the posts in this thread. It is difficult to know what to try next. I believe that what I want is rendition to which I have become accustomed with better presence and dynamic range.


I'll be reviewing the Dohnanyi cycle in my own 'best of the rest' Beethoven cycles (the ones Granate doesn't cover in his Beethoven round-up). What I will say is try the Skrowaczewski / Saarbrucken cycle. It has comparable speeds to Dohnanyi (but sometimes much brisker) but the sound is better and more realistic. Otherwise you should investigate Szell's classic Cleveland cycle if you want something along the lines of Dohnanyi (tempo-wise). Great sound for its age (stereo analogue) and far more convincing than Dohnanyi in all respects. Szell's 4th, 7th and 9tth are classics.


----------



## Granate

Awwww, welcome to Talk Classical, Paulg. Thank you for your small contribution, and have a great time in this forum looking for answers.

Merl, I have decided to count with the Pletnev cycle all of a sudden in Table 3. I'm currently listening to a surprisingly powerful No.4. I don't know if I should review the Skrowaczewski cycle in one of the German tables. I'm afraid that it is as lightweight (though really intelligent) as the Bruckner cycle.


----------



## Merl

Granate said:


> Awwww, welcome to Talk Classical, Paulg. Thank you for your small contribution, and have a great time in this forum looking for answers.
> 
> Merl, I have decided to count with the Pletnev cycle all of a sudden in Table 3. I'm currently listening to a surprisingly powerful No.4. I don't know if I should review the Skrowaczewski cycle in one of the German tables. I'm afraid that it is as lightweight (though really intelligent) as the Bruckner cycle.


Don't bother reviewing the Skrowaczewski (you'll give it a terrible review but I'm gonna do the opposite - lol), I'll do that but yep go ahead with the Pletnev. Btw, listen to the start of Pletnev's Pastoral. He's a little bit quick. Sounds like He's driving thru the countryside in a dragster. Hahaha.


----------



## starthrower

Great thread. After listening to a ton of samples, I'm sold on the Barenboim set recorded in the 90s. And for 12 dollars its a no brainer. Best sound goes to Jansons on BR Klassik, but the performances are too polite.


----------



## DavidA

Konsgaard said:


> Berlin Staatskapelle and Daniel Barenboim. This is hands down the best recorded set I have heard and I've heard most of them. I am referring to the recorded sound. But the performances are also among the best (if you don't mind the Furtwanglerian approach). I find both Abbado sets with the BPO of average sound quality. Chailly's sound is excellent, the performances are impressive but lacking in soul in my opinion. Wand's set with NDR (a digital set remastered in 24bit sound) offers both impressive recorded sound with really strong performances. In fact, when Gramophone magazine used to have its recordings guide, the Wand set was top choice for a Beethoven symphony set.


Must confess I find Barenboim pretty insufferable in Betthoven symphonies. The Furtwangler approach without the seeming spontaneity of Furtwangler so it seems contrived


----------



## starthrower

What about the London Symphony conducted by Butt? Never heard of this conductor, but it sounds good.


----------



## DavidA

starthrower said:


> What about the London Symphony conducted by Butt? Never heard of this conductor, but it sounds good.


It sounds good but....:lol:


----------



## starthrower

That's what I was thinking!


----------



## starthrower

What is the Furtwangler approach? I noticed The orchestra under Barenboim has a very heavy and dense string sound.


----------



## SixFootScowl

starthrower said:


> What about the London Symphony conducted by Butt? Never heard of this conductor, but it sounds good.


Can't be the same Butt as the one who conducts the Dunedin Consort, Scotland's leading Baroque Ensemble?


----------



## SixFootScowl

I am sticking with this as one of my top cycles. Just the symphonies, no other baggage. And note they are in order, which indicates a faster tempo (or hopefully not cuts). Sound is quite good for the age of this one (circa 1950).


----------



## starthrower

I'm looking for a set in modern sound.


----------



## starthrower

Yondani Butt is his name. The Beethoven set is on the Nimbus label.


----------



## SixFootScowl

starthrower said:


> I'm looking for a set in modern sound.


Ah yes. Should have looked at the OP. How about Zinman?


----------



## starthrower

Never listened to anything by Zinman. I don't listen to Beethoven symphonies very often. I'll just pick up one of the inexpensive modern cycles since all my other recordings are from the 60s.


----------



## SixFootScowl

starthrower said:


> Never listened to anything by Zinman. I don't listen to Beethoven symphonies very often. I'll just pick up one of the inexpensive modern cycles since all my other recordings are from the 60s.


There are a lot of good ones out there so you should be able to get a great cycle at a reasonable price.


----------



## starthrower

Yeah, Presto Classical has a bunch of good ones on sale for under 20-25 dollars. Chailly, Haitink, Barenboim, Abbado, Vanska, even conductors known more for baroque music like Hogwood, Gardiner, and Harnoncourt.


----------



## starthrower

Vanka's set is sounding great to me. Superior sound and solid performances.


----------



## wkasimer

starthrower said:


> I'm looking for a set in modern sound.


I also recommend Barenboim, for the best sonics at a dirt-cheap price, assuming that one likes the interpretations (I do).

Other sets in excellent sound are Vanska, Blomstedt (the new one with the Gewandhaus Orchestra), and Jansons, but they're all a little too bland for my taste.

The set conducted by Emanuel Krivine sounds great too, if you like or want and HIP set.


----------



## starthrower

I do like the Barenboim set that was recorded about 20 years ago. As I mentioned, he gets a great sound out of the orchestra. And tempos aren't too fast. I don't like rushed tempos.


----------



## SixFootScowl

starthrower said:


> I do like the Barenboim set that was recorded about 20 years ago. As I mentioned, he gets a great sound out of the orchestra. And tempos aren't too fast. *I don't like rushed tempos*.


You don't want Zinman then. Vanska is probably a great choice. Don't forget to look on Amazon, Ebay, and Bookbutler.com for better deals. Amazon has free shipping this month on items fulfilled by Amazon, but not the 2-day prime shipping. It will be 5 days shipping.


----------



## Merl

I reviewed a stack of those mentioned in my Beethoven Symphony Cycle round ups. The Yondani Butt set was one such example. I have it and its a good, solid set that's very traditional in its vision and implementation. Pretty good but no better. Agreed that the Barenboim's Berlin set is a very fine big-band set indeed and should not be confused with his largely dull second cycle with the West East Divan Orchestra (Beethoven for the sake of it). However, as I said in my roundup, the Skrowaczewski set, the Gielen (2nd set) and Norrington's Hannsler cycles are terrific. Totally agree with Starthrower too that Jansons is too graceful (but it is beautifully recorded and his 6th is superb). As for Vanska and Blomstedt (Leipzig), neither are great cycles. Blomstedt's first Dresden cycles is one of the great ones. Not digital and traditional pacing but massive sound.

My review of the Butt cycle is here.
Merl's Beethoven Symphony Cycle Reviews Pt7


----------



## starthrower

Blomstedt must be 105 by now. Don't these guys know when to retire? I thinks it's gonna be either the Barenboim Berlin, or the London Butt, lol!


----------



## wkasimer

starthrower said:


> Blomstedt must be 105 by now. Don't these guys know when to retire?


Blomstedt is 91. I saw him conduct in Boston last year, and while he certainly looks his age, he is the definition of the word "spry".


----------



## wkasimer

Merl said:


> Agreed that the Barenboim's Berlin set is a very fine big-band set indeed and should not be confused with his largely dull second cycle with the West East Divan Orchestra (Beethoven for the sake of it).


That West East Divan set was more about politics than Beethoven - absolutely forgettable.



> However, as I said in my roundup, the Skrowaczewski set, the Gielen (2nd set) and Norrington's Hannsler cycles are terrific.


I agree - I forgot about those two since I'm posting from memory at the office. Haven't heard the Norrington Hanssler set, but I fouind his earlier set pretty anemic.


----------



## wkasimer

Fritz Kobus said:


> You don't want Zinman then.


The advantage of Zinman, in its current incarnation, is that the set includes terrific performances of the concertos.


----------



## starthrower

wkasimer said:


> The advantage of Zinman, in its current incarnation, is that the set includes terrific performances of the concertos.


I could never get into Beethoven's concertos. Piano or violin. Unless I'm watching that hot Buniatishvilli chick on YouTube.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Say, has anybody mentioned Simon Rattle? He has a nice cycle from about 2002 that should be in fine sound and his tempo is not too slow, not too fast.


----------



## Merl

wkasimer said:


> That West East Divan set was more about politics than Beethoven - absolutely forgettable.
> 
> I agree - I forgot about those two since I'm posting from memory at the office. Haven't heard the Norrington Hanssler set, but I fouind his earlier set pretty anemic.


Norrington / LCP and Norrington / SWR couldn't are two totally different beasts. The first set was 'revolutionary' in its speed but the playing of the LCP and the big vision was pants. The Hannsler set is still very brisk but the recording is terrific and Norrington is much more flexible the 2nd time around. I love that cycle. As for Zinman he's another I reviewed. See links below.

Zinman
Merl's Beethoven Symphony Cycle Reviews Pt6

Norrington Mackerras, Skrowaczewski
Merl's Beethoven Symphony Cycle Reviews Pt5

#please note that both Mackerras sets should really be graded at 4* now (I was a bit harsh)


----------



## Merl

Fritz Kobus said:


> Say, has anybody mentioned Simon Rattle? He has a nice cycle from about 2002 that should be in fine sound and his tempo is not too slow, not too fast.


And you can pick that cycle up for buttons on the secondhand market at the moment. The Pastoral is rubbish though. The rest is good or very good (lovely 7th). Excellent packaging too. Looks great in my CD racks.


----------



## starthrower

People seem to give Rattle short shrift but he's pretty solid across a wide swath of music.


----------



## starthrower

Maybe it's the poodle look? He's the silver Kenny G.


----------



## starthrower

Is it just me, or is Barenboim a bit rubato with the tempo? Anyway, I've decided he's a bit sluggish with the Berlin players. I'm going with the late Yondani Butt. Great sound, and the tempos are just right. I've never been disappointed with any Nimbus recordings I've purchased.


----------



## bigshot

Nothing worse than a sluggish Butt.


----------



## starthrower

bigshot said:


> Nothing worse than a sluggish Butt.


But his renditions are sluggish. You must be thinking of Bohm.


----------



## SixFootScowl

starthrower said:


> But his renditions are sluggish. You must be thinking of Bohm.


Sluggish also: Walter and Klemperer. Had both, got rid of both. No patience for sluggish Beethoven symphonies.


----------



## Kiki

Fritz Kobus said:


> Sluggish also: Walter and Klemperer. Had both, got rid of both. No patience for sluggish Beethoven symphonies.


And Thielemann? Have to hear it to believe it. :lol:


----------



## starthrower

How about the Cluytens/Berlin set? It was reviewed as having good sound and fine performances.


----------



## Itullian

duplicate..............


----------



## Itullian

Wow, amazing.
All the ones you guys don't like are the ones I love.
Klemperer, Walter, Bohm, Lenny, Cluytens, Konwitchny..............................
To each his own.


----------



## starthrower

I like Lenny. I have Bohm on vinyl. Haven't heard the others.


----------



## Itullian

Non of the ones I like are digital recordings, but they are stereo.
It's just that I prefer soul over speed in my Beethoven.


----------



## SixFootScowl

starthrower said:


> Maybe it's the poodle look? He's the silver Kenny G.


Or the mad scientist look!


----------



## SixFootScowl

Itullian said:


> Wow, amazing.
> All the ones you guys don't like are the ones I love.
> Klemperer, Walter, Bohm, Lenny, Cluytens, Konwitchny..............................
> To each his own!


Ah you have answered the Cluytens quesiton: So he is spacious (nicer than sluggish) too.


----------



## starthrower

Itullian said:


> Non of the ones I like are digital recordings, but they are stereo.
> It's just that I prefer soul over speed in my Beethoven.


I agree! I don't like rushed tempos. I'm gonna grab a couple of sets at Presto since they are so cheap. I'm listening to Cluytens 9th on YouTube. Sounds great!


----------



## Itullian

starthrower said:


> I agree! I don't like rushed tempos. I'm gonna grab a couple of sets at Presto since they are so cheap. I'm listening to Cluytens 9th on YouTube. Sounds great!


One of the best imo.


----------



## starthrower

Itullian said:


> One of the best imo.


Too bad the cheap re-issue box has French liners, but I don't care. I have a similiar EMI/Erato box of Schubert sonatas by Zacherias and it's a great sounding set.


----------



## Itullian

starthrower said:


> Too bad the cheap re-issue box has French liners, but I don't care. I have a similiar EMI/Erato box of Schubert sonatas by Zacherias and it's a great sounding set.


That Zacherias is a great set.


----------



## starthrower

Itullian said:


> That Zacherias is a great set.


I didn't know dick about Schubert pianists when I bought it, but it was the cheapest one. I got lucky!


----------



## starthrower

Cycles I'm considering. Will probably get at least two of these, or more. What do you think?
The only cycle I currently own on CD is Bernstein/NYP.

Cluytens/Berlin
Kletzki/Czech Phil
Karajan/Philharmonia remastered 1950s w/ mono & stereo 9th
Barenboim/Staatskapelle


----------



## Itullian

Cuytens, Barenboim


----------



## starthrower

Itullian said:


> Cuytens, Barenboim


Interestingly, those were my first two choices, and they are pretty different. I was only going to get the Karajan for a historic addition. And the Kletzki? I was still debating on that one. The sound is good and the playing sounds sharp but it doesn't have much personality.


----------



## regnaDkciN

> Originally Posted by *Phil (not) in Magnolia*
> Other reviewers have expressed their opinions of this collection of Claudio Abbado's recordings of Beethoven's symphonies, recorded in 2000, actually in mostly positive reviews which just goes to show you that not everyone's taste is the same.
> 
> The main purpose of my review is to make others aware that there is a newer release of the Beethoven Symphonies, also conducted by Claudio Abbado and with the Berlin Philharmonic, and available for less than half the price of this box set: Beethoven: The Symphonies, but most importantly the newer recordings were made in order to document Abbado's "final interpretative wishes" and to replace these earlier recordings made with the Berlin Philharmonic just one year earlier.
> 
> *Yes, Claudio Abbado essentially apologized for the performances released with this box set and just a single year later re-recorded them. Quite extraordinary, that.*
> 
> The newer recordings have Symphonies 1-8 recorded live in Rome in 2001 especially for that release. Symphony 9 is from the same 2000 performance as this box set, recorded live in Berlin, but re-edited to satisfy maestro Abbado's requirements.
> 
> Again, the later recordings were made in order to document Abbado's "final interpretative wishes" and to replace these earlier recordings he had made.
> 
> The Gramophone Classical Music Guide 2012 gives the newer box set a high recommendation, as does Penguin Guide 2008. That doesn't necessarily mean that the later interpretations will be the "best" for any individual listener, but it is a generally reliable indication that there is something special with the recordings and they are worth seriously considering, among the vast array of other recordings of Beethoven's symphonies available (my personal favorite being Gardiner (Beethoven: The Symphonies) but I have others as well including Karajan's Beethoven: 9 Symphonies (1963), plenty of variety to enjoy what for me are the best symphonies in the repertoire).
> 
> Again - be aware of the alternate box set which "should" be preferable, and is available for a much lower price.
> 
> Or - heck, If you for whatever reason feel that this earlier set of recordings is one that you wish to have, then know that it is no longer being produced by Deutsche Grammophon, so that price is likely to go up even further in the future.


Forgive me for being churlish, but this one really rubbed me the wrong way. As someone who bought the first of the two Abbado/BPO releases (in pricey DVD-A format, to boot) the idea that he could "apologize" and release an entirely new set a _very_ few months later would only have been "quite extraordinary" had he and DG allowed purchasers of the first set to trade in their copies for the "corrected" version. As it is, it was more like being stamped across the head with "SUCKERS!!!" while being told that you're welcome to shell out again to get the "apology release" at full-boat. Thanks, but no thanks.

P.S.: The first release could serve as a drug-free substitute for Sominex, IMHO.


----------



## DavidA

starthrower said:


> Cycles I'm considering. Will probably get at least two of these, or more. What do you think?
> The only cycle I currently own on CD is Bernstein/NYP.
> 
> Cluytens/Berlin
> Kletzki/Czech Phil
> Karajan/Philharmonia remastered 1950s w/ mono & stereo 9th
> Barenboim/Staatskapelle


The Karajan version to have is probably the 1963 stereo supplemented with a 6th from 1977 or 1955
His 9th from 1977 is probably his best too


----------



## premont

starthrower said:


> Cycles I'm considering. Will probably get at least two of these, or more. What do you think?


Cluytens/Berlin
Kletzki/Czech Phil


----------



## Merl

Of the 'slower' cycles Kletzki is one of the best. The Czech PO sound wonderful. I don't mind some slower Beethoven (some Klemperer apart from his dire 7th, Asahina's Fontec and Exton cycles, Bohm, etc) but I find Walter's Beethoven well-played but boring. Where Klemperer and Asahina have forward momentum I find Walter just trudge along. However, compared to Celi's vile LVB he sounds like Chailly. As for Abbado, none of his sets float my boat but the Rome set is by far the best. His cycles lack character, more than anything. BTW, I've just starting relistening to Beethoven symphonies again after my marathon reviewing session. I have about 5 sets to review and feel another part to the symphony cycle reviews is on the cards.


----------



## wkasimer

regnaDkciN said:


> P.S.: The first release could serve as a drug-free substitute for Sominex, IMHO.


And the second recording isn't much better.


----------



## starthrower

Kletzki doesn't sound slow to my ears. His tempos sound moderate like so many other Beethoven conductors. It's a good recording expertly played but I don't notice anything unique about it. I don't want to end up with too many samey sounding conductors. The Barenboim is definitely different sounding, the Chailly is extremely swift, Bohm and Cluytens have a certain beauty and feel that younger conductors lack. 

There's a lot of reliable sets I could take or leave. Wand, Szell, Karajan stereo sets. I still need to listen to some other conductors. I decided against Vanska for both Beethoven and Sibelius. I haven't listened to Gielen, or the Oehms set.


----------



## perdido34

Fritz Kobus said:


> Ah yes. Should have looked at the OP. How about Zinman?


I really like the Zinman set. It is energetically performed and well recorded. I find it much better than the other "historically informed" performances with modern orchestras, which to me sound anonymous and soulless (Chailly, Vanska).

If you want SACD, the Haitink/LSO set is also excellent.


----------



## starthrower

Anybody familiar with Monteux's Beethoveen? There's a 6 CD set on Eloquence.
https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/8035671--beethoven-symphonies-nos-1-9


----------



## D Smith

I have the Cluytens and love it. Karajan's Philharmonia has some excellent performances but the sound is variable; I prefer his 63 Berlin. I have the Monteux as well. His Pastoral is my long time favourite and the other symphonies are well worth hearing.


----------



## Merl

starthrower said:


> Anybody familiar with Monteux's Beethoveen? There's a 6 CD set on Eloquence.
> https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/8035671--beethoven-symphonies-nos-1-9


I have the Monteux cycle and it's good but no more (IMO). The recorded sound is patchy across the set which is not helped by having different orchestras. The LSO recordings are better than the VPO ones. However there's still quite a bit to like. The Pastoral is excellent and the 1st is very good. Other performances are good except a very boring 5th. Speeds are moderate but slow movements are slower than many. Quite a few people rate the Eroica in this set but it's never floated my boat. Tbh, Starthrower I'd look elsewhere for something more unique but have a listen on youtube.


----------



## brahms4

Regarding the Monteux cycle,the First and the 8th, with the LSO as well as the Sixth with the VPO,were RCA Living Stereo recordings.Monteux`s classic Decca recordings of Dvorak,Elgar,and Brahms were also RCA Living Stereo recordings.There was some kind of arrangement between RCA and Decca.There were several other recordings with other conductors(Reiner for one) that were included.


----------



## starthrower

Thanks for the info, guys!


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Bohm is the most consistently good cycle in modern sound, followed by Bernstein on DG and Karajan '63.

I love the Cluytens 6th but am not blown away by the cycle as a whole. It's a good, consistent cycle with reliable interpretations.

To the poster who calls Klemperer and Walter "sluggish" I call them monumental and profound. I don't like my Beethoven skippy, light and trivial.

On that note, Andromeda has gathered the best sounding live Furtwängler performances in a very inexpensive complete set: https://www.amazon.com/Furtwängler-...+beethoven&dpPl=1&dpID=51wiuxFBHJL&ref=plSrch


----------



## SixFootScowl

starthrower said:


> Anybody familiar with Monteux's Beethoveen? There's a 6 CD set on Eloquence.
> https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/8035671--beethoven-symphonies-nos-1-9


I have it, but got it before they put out that nice package, so mine is in three parts. Two double decca sets, one of each orchestra, and the Ninth separately. I was sorry I didn't wait for the nice box set and might buy it anyway if I find a good used price. I paid through the nose too. So it is split between two orchestras but IMO is a fine cycle. I think Monteau is somewhere between the too fast and the too slow cycles, or just about right.


----------



## starthrower

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Bohm is the most consistently good cycle in modern sound, followed by Bernstein on DG and Karajan '63.
> 
> I love the Cluytens 6th but am not blown away by the cycle as a whole. It's a good, consistent cycle with reliable interpretations.
> 
> To the poster who calls Klemperer and Walter "sluggish" I call them monumental and profound. I don't like my Beethoven skippy, light and trivial.
> 
> On that note, Andromeda has gathered the best sounding live Furtwängler performances in a very inexpensive complete set: https://www.amazon.com/Furtwängler-...+beethoven&dpPl=1&dpID=51wiuxFBHJL&ref=plSrch


The sound isn't very good on that Andromeda set. I found a restored edition of the 9th from that set on YouTube that sounds amazing! But I'm not sure of the label? Maybe Audite? I have Bohm on vinyl which I haven't listened to since the 80s but I remember enjoying his relaxed tempos and attention to detail.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

starthrower said:


> The sound isn't very good on that Andromeda set. I found a restored edition of the 9th from that set on YouTube that sounds amazing! But I'm not sure of the label? Maybe Audite? I have Bohm on vinyl which I haven't listened to since the 80s but I remember enjoying his relaxed tempos and attention to detail.


The Audite transfer of the '54 Lucerne 9th is the best, even better than the Tahra.

If you can find them the best combination of sound and performance for Furtwängler are that 9th on Audite and the following:

12/8/52 3rd on Tahra
5/23/54 5th and 6th on Tahra
4/14/53 7th and 8th on DG or Tahra

This Andromeda set gathers all these performances together for $20, so might be more worth it to a newbie.


----------



## regnaDkciN

wkasimer said:


> And the second recording isn't much better.


Indeed. I just found the 2001 set on Tidal and gave parts of it a listen. Some improvement, but not a whole lot, and certainly not comparable to any of the great cycles. I must admit to being puzzled -- I normally find Abbado a reliable guide through the German symphonic repertoire (Schubert, Mendelssohn, Brahms, etc.), so why is his Beethoven such an aberration?


----------



## DarkAngel

Brahmsianhorn said:


> The Audite transfer of the '54 Lucerne 9th is the best, even better than the Tahra.


This is the best sound for 54 Lucerne 9th I have heard, check long sample of last movement.....

https://www.pristineclassical.com/collections/artist-wilhelm-furtwangler/products/pasc261


----------



## Merl

DarkAngel said:


> This is the best sound for 54 Lucerne 9th I have heard, check long sample of last movement.....
> 
> https://www.pristineclassical.com/collections/artist-wilhelm-furtwangler/products/pasc261


Whilst i still have other great 9ths i prefer (some of you will say this is sacrilege but hey ho) ive got to admit that Andrew Rose has done a superb job on the Furtwangler 9th and has tamed some of the rawness of the original recording, without reducing the impact. People who love this recording should hear this. Even I was impressed and im no Furtwangler fanboy.


----------



## SixFootScowl

I got my Simon Rattle Beethoven symphony cycle last Tuesday and have been listening to it quite a bit. Think I am on my 5th trip through it. Curiously, it gets a lot of bad reviews, yet some very good reviews. The most important review though is my ears. If I like it, it is enough.


----------



## SixFootScowl

So anyone thinking of buying this Simon Rattle Beethoven symphony cycle, consider that it is available in a different package that includes Fidelio and a couple piano concertos (pretty sure it is the same symphony cycle):

For some reason, according to the listing https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0043H81O8, this set gives you extra performances of PC#1 and Symphony #5 (see disk 7).


----------



## Merl

regnaDkciN said:


> Indeed. I just found the 2001 set on Tidal and gave parts of it a listen. Some improvement, but not a whole lot, and certainly not comparable to any of the great cycles. I must admit to being puzzled -- I normally find Abbado a reliable guide through the German symphonic repertoire (Schubert, Mendelssohn, Brahms, etc.), so why is his Beethoven such an aberration?


Abbado's Beethoven is far from an aberration. Its just rather characterless. His Brahms is a thousand times better.


----------



## Kiki

Fritz Kobus said:


> ...... this set gives you extra performances of PC#1 and Symphony #5 (see disk 7).


I suppose Warner was trying to be complete by including Rattle's earlier #5 recording and Lars Vogt playing the "bonus" Glenn Gould cadenza in PC#1, which has to be a good thing for collectors who need not hunt them down separately.


----------



## maudia

In terms of sound - I love the Emmanuel Krivine cycle - and his 7th is one of my favourites


----------



## Kiki

Krivine's is one of my favourite set of Beethoven. I like agile and impactful Beethoven that reminds me how revolutionary this music is and that's what this set is about. The sonics, IMHO, is OK, recorded at a rather high level... and Krivine employed not only human singers but also ducks in the finale of the 9th - that's probably my only complaint (try the beginning of the finale). :lol:


----------



## Merl

Kiki said:


> Krivine's is one of my favourite set of Beethoven. I like agile and impactful Beethoven that reminds me how revolutionary this music is and that's what this set is about. The sonics, IMHO, is OK, recorded at a rather high level... and Krivine employed not only human singers but also ducks in the finale of the 9th - that's probably my only complaint (try the beginning of the finale). :lol:


Although I like the Krivine set I find the recording odd. Strange balances, occasionally scrawny strings and a timpani that seems to totally disappear at times (whilst at other times sounding like someone's hitting a cushion) ruin the set for me. The performances are very good (especially the 7th and 8th) but the 9th is terrible, IMO.


----------



## jim prideaux

Merl said:


> Although I like the Krivine set I find the recording odd. Strange balances, occasionally scrawny strings and a timpani that seems to totally disappear at times (whilst at other times sounding like someone's hitting a cushion) ruin the set for me. The performances are very good (especially the 7th and 8th) but the 9th is terrible, IMO.


Thanks-was looking for a cheap second hand copy of the Krivine cycle and getting nowhere......you have resolved that concern and I think I will stick with the cycles I already have access to.


----------



## DavidA

Kiki said:


> Krivine's is one of my favourite set of Beethoven. I like agile and impactful Beethoven that reminds me how revolutionary this music is and that's what this set is about. The sonics, IMHO, is OK, recorded at a rather high level... and Krivine employed not only human singers but also ducks in the finale of the 9th - that's probably my only complaint (try the beginning of the finale). :lol:


From what I've heard it is very eccentric and not for general recommendation


----------



## Red Terror

DavidA said:


> From what I've heard it is very eccentric and not for general recommendation


Ducks are delicious. I must get my hands on this set-PRONTO!


----------



## Kiki

Merl said:


> Although I like the Krivine set I find the recording odd. Strange balances, occasionally scrawny strings and a timpani that seems to totally disappear at times (whilst at other times sounding like someone's hitting a cushion) ruin the set for me. The performances are very good (especially the 7th and 8th) but the 9th is terrible, IMO.


With the sound recorded at such a high level (I mean loud!), usually it is a bad indication for the engineering quality. Fortunately it's not overblown, or too compressed in the dynamics so it's listenable. Chailly/Gewandhaus suffers from a similar problem and suffers more there.

You're right about Krivine's strings and timpani. That's a disappointment. Despite that, the performance in general is spontaneous and full of attacks. The lowest point for me is the finale of No. 9. The baritone is OK, the rest of the singing so-so, but the "ducks" quacking at the beginning of the finale is distracting (engineering artifacts? The period cello strings? I have no idea what that is although not real ducks I'm pretty sure. I wish it were.)


----------



## Kiki

DavidA said:


> From what I've heard it is very eccentric and not for general recommendation


Well he's got "ducks". :lol: Seriously, Gardiner's would be a more pleasant sounding HIP recommendation on period instruments, although it's a bit posh for me. The solid performance of Haselböck's ongoing HIP cycle should not be missed either IMHO.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Red Terror said:


> Ducks are delicious. I must get my hands on this set-PRONTO!


Another odd duck Beethoven symphony set is The Hanover Band. I had it. I don't have it anymore. This is the ultimate original instruments performance, so much so that one wonders what they recorded it with. I think it was a single microphone dangling from the ceiling or something like that.


----------



## Merl

Fritz Kobus said:


> Another odd duck Beethoven symphony set is The Hanover Band. I had it. I don't have it anymore. This is the ultimate original instruments performance, so much so that one wonders what they recorded it with. I think it was a single microphone dangling from the ceiling or something like that.


Now that truly is a case of the recording ruining what is essentially a well-performed cycle. Dreadful recording. I've never noticed the 'ducks' in the Krivine 9th but I'm damn sure I'm gonna give it a listen later, lol.


----------



## Mowgli

12/16/1770


----------



## Merl

Kiki said:


> The lowest point for me is the finale of No. 9. The baritone is OK, the rest of the singing so-so, but the "ducks" quacking at the beginning of the finale is distracting (engineering artifacts? The period cello strings? I have no idea what that is although not real ducks I'm pretty sure. I wish it were.)


I've just listened and although I don't hear 'ducks' it's a very odd sound (a clown's car horn?). Certainly made me smile.


----------



## Kiki

Merl said:


> I've just listened and although I don't hear 'ducks' it's a very odd sound (a clown's car horn?). Certainly made me smile.


Does it quark in sync with the notes? If it does then that must be it! :lol:

Well, I suppose it's easier to get someone to blow a clown's car horn than to convince a duck to quark!

Oh there's no strings at the beginning of the finale.... so what are those quarks?!


----------



## Becca

Kiki said:


> Does it quark in sync with the notes? If it does then that must be it! :lol:
> 
> Well, I suppose it's easier to get someone to blow a clown's car horn than to convince a duck to quark!
> 
> Oh there's no strings at the beginning of the finale.... so what are those quarks?!


That depends ... what colour or flavour are the quarks? Top, Bottom, Up, Down, Strange or Charm?


----------



## Becca

Becca said:


> That depends ... what colour or flavour are the quarks? Top, Bottom, Up, Down, Strange or Charm?


...and how many? I hope it is 3.

_"Three quarks for Muster Mark! 
Sure he hasn't got much of a bark
And sure any he has it's all beside the mark. "_


----------



## RobertKC

If anyone is seeking state-of-the-art surround-sound audio (DTS-HD MA 5.0) and video, I like this Blu-ray box set, as discussed in my thread about Blu-ray: https://www.talkclassical.com/54011-blu-ray-videos-classical.html#post1399320

Rafael Frühbeck de Burgos Danish NSO

Ludwig van Beethoven: Symphonies Nos. 1-9
Joaquín Rodrigo: Concierto de Aranjuez
Hector Berlioz: Symphonie fantastique, Op. 14
Richard Strauss: Eine Alpensinfonie (An Alpine Symphony), Op. 64, TrV 233​


----------



## Kiki

Becca said:


> ...and how many? I hope it is 3.
> 
> _"Three quarks for Muster Mark!
> Sure he hasn't got much of a bark
> And sure any he has it's all beside the mark. "_


In the old days, there was a plastic toy in the shape of a flag. You swing the plastic pole in a circle, and the plastic flag will swing revolving the pole, and that makes a continuous rattling sound. Pretty much mid to low frequencies I'd say.

Instead of swinging continuously, imagine doing it in a stop-go-stop-go pattern to make distinctive "notes" of rattles. Now that should sound like quark-quark-quark-... Sync these notes to the notes on the score, and there you have it, those quarks at the beginning of the Krivine's finale!

I hate to talk equipment, but these "quarks" are audible on all my setups but to different degrees of audibility.

Think I need a pint now!

Enough quarks for me. Maybe we should start looking for strange sounds in recordings of Tristan next.

:lol:


----------



## DavidA

RobertKC said:


> If anyone is seeking state-of-the-art surround-sound audio (DTS-HD MA 5.0) and video, I like this Blu-ray box set, as discussed in my thread about Blu-ray: https://www.talkclassical.com/54011-blu-ray-videos-classical.html#post1399320
> 
> Rafael Frühbeck de Burgos Danish NSO
> 
> Ludwig van Beethoven: Symphonies Nos. 1-9
> Joaquín Rodrigo: Concierto de Aranjuez
> Hector Berlioz: Symphonie fantastique, Op. 14
> Richard Strauss: Eine Alpensinfonie (An Alpine Symphony), Op. 64, TrV 233​


The problem might be that the conductor is not a noted Beethoven conductor


----------



## Merl

RobertKC said:


> If anyone is seeking state-of-the-art surround-sound audio (DTS-HD MA 5.0) and video, I like this Blu-ray box set, as discussed in my thread about Blu-ray: https://www.talkclassical.com/54011-blu-ray-videos-classical.html#post1399320
> 
> Rafael Frühbeck de Burgos Danish NSO
> 
> Ludwig van Beethoven: Symphonies Nos. 1-9
> Joaquín Rodrigo: Concierto de Aranjuez
> Hector Berlioz: Symphonie fantastique, Op. 14
> Richard Strauss: Eine Alpensinfonie (An Alpine Symphony), Op. 64, TrV 233​


Fruhbeck de Burgos made a number of old-school Beethoven symphony discs back in the early 90s with the LSO (that appeared on the Collins Classics label) but they were fairly staid and largely stiff renditions (i particularly remember a dull 7th and 8th). Ive yet to hear all of this new cycle but judging by the clips of him on youtube (with the same orchestra) he's at least took a less stiff view of things and they do sound pretty good (for 'traditionsl' performances). I wont comment until i finally get to hear the whole set (which should be soon). I liked the 7th i heard a while back but who knows. Gotta be better than his dull LSO discs.


----------



## gellio

DavidA said:


> Far to fast. Disappointing set. As if speed is everything


But he's adhering to Beethoven's metronome markings. Surely, the speed is then what Beethoven wanted and what Beethoven composed.


----------



## KenOC

gellio said:


> But he's adhering to Beethoven's metronome markings. Surely, the speed is then what Beethoven wanted and what Beethoven composed.


Lots of controversy about Ludwig's metronome markings! Some claim his metronome was malfunctioning, or that nephew Carl recorded Beethoven's instructions wrong. Others, that his deafness (he mostly added his markings late in life) led him to ignore the "hall effect" and acoustic resonance that would suggest slower tempi in actual performance.

There are no final answers here.


----------



## gellio

I love Karajan’s. I love Solti’s. I love Chailly’s. I find things enjoyable in Barenboim’s.....but there is One Cycle to Rule Them All - John Elliot Gardiner. His performances are so riveting - they are what I imagine Beethoven intended. I can listen to the whole cycle over and over and over, and whenever I try listening to one of my other cycles, after a few minutes, I am back to Jeggy’s.


----------



## gellio

KenOC said:


> Lots of controversy about Ludwig's metronome markings! Some claim his metronome was malfunctioning, or that nephew Carl recorded Beethoven's instructions wrong. Others, that his deafness (he mostly added his markings late in life) led him to ignore the "hall effect" and acoustic resonance that would suggest slower tempi in actual performance.
> 
> There are no final answers here.


I did not know that. Thank you. Listening to the Fourth Symphony right now. SO UNDERRATED.


----------



## KenOC

gellio said:


> I love Karajan's. I love Solti's. I love Chailly's. I find things enjoyable in Barenboim's.....but there is One Cycle to Rule Them All - John Elliot Gardiner. His performances are so riveting - they are what I imagine Beethoven intended. I can listen to the whole cycle over and over and over, and whenever I try listening to one of my other cycles, after a few minutes, I am back to Jeggy's.


Here's the ranking from an Amazon extended poll a few years ago. JEG and Herbie pretty much tied for first, but the newer cycle took the lead in a run-off. A few cycles that are popular now were little-known then and didn't really register.

1 - Gardiner: John Eliot Gardiner, Orchestre Révolutionnaire et Romantique
2 - Karajan, 1963: Herbert von Karajan, Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra
3 - Furtwangler: Wilhelm Furtwangler, various orchestras (EMI box)
4 - Barenboim: Daniel Barenboim, Staatskapelle Berlin
5 - Walter: Bruno Walter, Columbia Symphony Orchestra
6 - Wand: Günter Wand, NDR-Sinfonieorchester
7 - Karajan, 1970s: Herbert von Karajan, Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra
8 - Jochum: Eugen Jochum, London Symphony Orchestra
9 - Klemperer: Otto Klemperer, Philharmonia Orchestra of London
10 - Toscanini: Arturo Toscanini, NBC Symphony Orchestra


----------



## gellio

DavidA said:


> The Chailly has wonderful sound and the orchestral playing is superb. What I do not like are Chaiily's over-quick tempi in many places. They sound more 'hurried' than 'urgent' to me.


I do like different interpretations. It gives me more of a reason to buy more cycles.


----------



## gellio

starthrower said:


> Blomstedt must be 105 by now. Don't these guys know when to retire? I thinks it's gonna be either the Barenboim Berlin, or the London Butt, lol!


I'm going to see him conduct the Sixth Symphony (my favorite symphony) with the San Francisco Orchestra next month. Can't wait.


----------



## gellio

Fritz Kobus said:


> Sluggish also: Walter and Klemperer. Had both, got rid of both. No patience for sluggish Beethoven symphonies.


I hate Klemperer for that reason. His Fidelio and Zauberflote are ridiculously slow and lacking in any drama (at least to me). But his Missa Solemnis is glorious.


----------



## DarkAngel

gellio said:


> I hate Klemperer for that reason. His Fidelio and Zauberflote are ridiculously slow and lacking in any drama (at least to me). But his Missa Solemnis is glorious.


I don't listen to much Klemp LVB, but he has a few live performances from late 1950s that stand out, these two I return to and find many things to admire..........


----------



## 13hm13

perdido34 said:


> I really like the Zinman set. It is energetically performed and well recorded. I find it much better than the other "historically informed" performances with modern orchestras, which to me sound anonymous and soulless (Chailly, Vanska).


Just to be clear, these Zinman recordings from the late 1990s with Tonhalle (Zurich) on ARTE NOVA. And not the more recent Berlin PO recordings.
Zinman/Tonhalle is probably my go-to cycle for symphs and concertos.

You many not like the Zinman/Tonhalle interpretation, which is the:


> Jonathan Del Mar Urtext edition, published by Bärenreiter, these performances steal the occasional surprise on an unsuspecting listener, with some notes and numerous articulations notably at variance with traditional texts.
> 
> Read more: http://www.musicweb-international.c...phonies_zinman_7432165410-2.htm#ixzz5bbJaxDu4


IAC, here's the 9th:


----------



## ethan417

Merl said:


> I just collect them. Can't help myself. Dudamels cycle will be next. I like his 7th but not his 5th, already.


Thank you for your comprehensive reviews of the Beethoven Symphonies.
I have enjoyed reading them and exploring those that received and 'A'.

I would like to ask for your guidance - I realize it's subjective - but your's is an informed opinion that I respect and a passion that I admire.

Here's what I own:
Szell 
Harnoncourt - 1991 release 
Osmo Vänskä - 3, 4, 5, 8, and 9 (I bought these before the set was complete)

Here's what I'm considering:

Osmo Vänskä - completing the set (I think it's cheaper to purchase the box)
Herbert von Karajan - 1963 - SACD w Blue Ray - release
Paul Kletzki
Adam Fisher

Would you please weigh in on the above: what you agree with, what you disagree with, and what I'm missing.

Thank you.


----------



## Merl

ethan417 said:


> Thank you for your comprehensive reviews of the Beethoven Symphonies.
> I have enjoyed reading them and exploring those that received and 'A'.
> 
> I would like to ask for your guidance - I realize it's subjective - but your's is an informed opinion that I respect and a passion that I admire.
> 
> Here's what I own:
> Szell
> Harnoncourt - 1991 release
> Osmo Vänskä - 3, 4, 5, 8, and 9 (I bought these before the set was complete)
> 
> Here's what I'm considering:
> 
> Osmo Vänskä - completing the set (I think it's cheaper to purchase the box)
> Herbert von Karajan - 1963 - SACD w Blue Ray - release
> Paul Kletzki
> Adam Fisher
> 
> Would you please weigh in on the above: what you agree with, what you disagree with, and what I'm missing.
> 
> Thank you.


Wow, thanks but when I don't know what kind of sound you're looking for it's hard to recommend. There really are so many sets to suit all tastes and styles and you really might not like what I like (we all like different things) . All the sets above are at least good and some are excellent.

However, f you want a big-boned Beethoven set then Karajan is always a safe bet and it was my first set. I've not heard the SACD release but I've been informed its rather good but Matt from here and others swear that the 77 cycle SACD is even better (the 63 v 77 argument has been going on for years). So, If big, rhythmically solid LVB is what you're after then Karajan is your man. If you want a quirky, brisker, modern set in great sound and with interesting dynamics then Fischer's a further choice. There was a lot of fuss about the Vanska when it came out but I was disappointed with it when I heard it (mostly with the sound) but I've not heard it in ages and maybe I just heard a bad rip. At the time the performances didn't do it for me but I've changed my mind on many sets so I'd like to return to it given some time. It may even make it into my next lot of reviews so I can give it a proper listen, again . In fact I will. The Kletzki is a slower style set but it's so well-played by the Czechs it's self-recommending but sonically nowhere near some of the others.

So in response I'd have to know EXACTLY what you're looking for in a cycle. It's like fitting someone for a suit
If I know exactly what you're after I, or other very knowledgeable people in here, can point you in the right direction. What are you looking for in:

Style - Historically informed, big-band brisk or fast, big-band moderate pace, big-band slow, chamber size moderate, chamber size brisk, quirky, to metronome marks (very fast)? 
Sound - Historical mono, analogue stereo, digital stereo, high-res, bluray, SACD standard - do you mind? 
Cost - is this important? Are you after a bargain or are you willing to pay anything for the right cycle? There are some incredible bargains out there to be had and some ridiculously overpriced or just expensive sets

Really I'd need to know the answers to those questions before recommending anything to you and even then if I'd just hope you liked it. Tell me more (as the cast of Grease once said).


----------



## Caroline

Hi Merl,

Those are good questions - you must work in sales.  

While listening to the Hanover Band performing the 7th (youtube is a wonderful thing even if it is now part of google) I have been perusing this thread and listening to Günter Wand, Fricsay, et al. 

Who is a purist? Meaning - who is closest to delivering a performance as Beethoven intended them to be performed. He was so specific. I have Gardiner's ORR and assorted recordings (not boxed sets). For me - it is beyond how it 'feels' and how it 'sounds.'

So I am HIP, period instruments, purist interpretation....without sacrificing sound quality. Unfortunately the iconic performances are pre-digital era.

On a technical note - how are SACD's created using old recordings? What do they sound like?


----------



## jegreenwood

Caroline said:


> . . . .
> On a technical note - how are SACD's created using old recordings? What do they sound like?


Probably someone knows more than I do, but basically they play back the original tapes (or as close to the original as they can find and preferably on playback equipment from the era) and digitize the analog sound - just as they would have to digitize the analog sound of a live orchestra.

They can sound very good. I have a lot of SACDs of RCA Living Stereo albums and a few of Mercury Living Presence albums. Some of these used three mics for recording, so you can get a center channel. 
Some companies dug up the quadraphonic masters from the early 70's, most notably Pentatone. Even Epic/Columbia's Szell recordings sound much better. I also have quite a few 50's and 60's jazz albums on SACD. But I think more important than higher resolution is a careful remastering. A number of companies doing SACD releases will remaster as well.


----------



## Caroline

jegreenwood said:


> Probably someone knows more than I do, but basically they play back the original tapes (or as close to the original as they can find and preferably on playback equipment from the era) and digitize the analog sound - just as they would have to digitize the analog sound of a live orchestra.
> 
> They can sound very good. I have a lot of SACDs of RCA Living Stereo albums and a few of Mercury Living Presence albums. Some of these used three mics for recording, so you can get a center channel.
> Some companies dug up the quadraphonic masters from the early 70's, most notably Pentatone. Even Epic/Columbia's Szell recordings sound much better. I also have quite a few 50's and 60's jazz albums on SACD. But I think more important than higher resolution is a careful remastering. A number of companies doing SACD releases will remaster as well.


This is pretty interesting. I did a little research in an effort to learn a bit more. On the way - I came across an article that SACD has been around for the past few years - and with the popularity of ios - they lost traction (in fact as the article states about CDs) - I don't know if this is true or worthy of a discussion. I often wonder about downloading high res files and not having media...

Would be an idea for a separate discussion or the writer's comment is off-base. On newer (classical) releases I see SACDs.

Back on the SACD - I read something about hissing. It was suggested that it may be due to "...the tape source used seemingly to be from an unfiltered (for lack of a better phrase) transfer off (one assumes) "the master." Thus there is plenty of tape hiss apparent, which I view as a good thing, indicating that -- perhaps -- they didn't try to de-hiss things using various and sundry processors and equalization. I will suggest that the audible hiss might be a result of the tape being presented in an uncompressed manner for the SACD...

That said, the SACD version is a different listen than the LP, not harsh as a standard CD might be, but still a little on the angular side. Instead of a warm hit to the senses, you get a sharp tang in your ear."


----------



## jegreenwood

My understanding is that Sony originally developed DSD, the file format for SACDs, for archival purposes. Then from what I've read - perhaps not from wholly reliable sources - with the CD patent running out, and frustrated by CD copying and ripping, they decided to release discs in that format (which had heavy copy protection).* That was about 1999. Surround sound was an added benefit. But due to a number of factors, not least being the popularity of the iPod, it just didn't catch on. The market now is pretty much limited to smaller classical labels and audiophile labels releasing SACD versions of existing albums - these make up much of my SACD jazz collection.

Still, to my mind most of the improvement is in the mastering. 

Now back to Beethoven. FWIW, there's a very nice SACD set of the Szell cycle from Japan.

* Although it's been hacked. Still ripping them is a PITA.


----------



## Caroline

jegreenwood said:


> My understanding is that Sony originally developed DSD, the file format for SACDs, for archival purposes. Then from what I've read - perhaps not from wholly reliable sources - with the CD patent running out, and frustrated by CD copying and ripping, they decided to release discs in that format (which had heavy copy protection).* That was about 1999. Surround sound was an added benefit. But due to a number of factors, not least being the popularity of the iPod, it just didn't catch on. The market now is pretty much limited to smaller classical labels and audiophile labels releasing SACD versions of existing albums - these make up much of my SACD jazz collection.
> 
> Still, to my mind most of the improvement is in the mastering.
> 
> Now back to Beethoven. FWIW, there's a very nice SACD set of the Szell cycle from Japan.
> 
> * Although it's been hacked. Still ripping them is a PITA.


Is the Szell from 1959? It was recorded in Cleveland - I didn't see anything from Japan (on Youtube).

Although not a cycle - I did uncover a NY Times listing the best recording of each symphony - complete with youtube links. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/27/arts/music/beethoven-symphony.html

I will check out some of these later as I am not familar with them (for example, Furtwängler's the 9th in 1951). For the First, Klemperer's 1957 performance wins their best award.

On the SACD and download side - yes - it is a PITA. I have to find a simpler solution for myself.


----------



## jegreenwood

Caroline said:


> Is the Szell from 1959? It was recorded in Cleveland - I didn't see anything from Japan (on Youtube).
> 
> Although not a cycle - I did uncover a NY Times listing the best recording of each symphony - complete with youtube links. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/27/arts/music/beethoven-symphony.html
> 
> I will check out some of these later as I am not familar with them (for example, Furtwängler's the 9th in 1951). For the First, Klemperer's 1957 performance wins their best award.
> 
> On the SACD and download side - yes - it is a PITA. I have to find a simpler solution for myself.


The Szell cycle is with the Cleveland Orchestra circa 1959, but Sony Japan remastered it in SACD. Stereo only of course.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

jegreenwood said:


> The Szell cycle is with the Cleveland Orchestra circa 1959, but Sony Japan remastered it in SACD. Stereo only of course.


I have the standard box set of this. Can't be the remastered as the sound is lacking at times


----------



## jegreenwood

Oldhoosierdude said:


> I have the standard box set of this. Can't be the remastered as the sound is lacking at times
> 
> View attachment 141380


That's right, it's not, despite what the box says. I bought it, compared the file information with my circa 1990's set and they were exactly the same. I then returned it.


----------



## wkasimer

Oldhoosierdude said:


> I have the standard box set of this. Can't be the remastered as the sound is lacking at times
> 
> View attachment 141380


BMG/Sony has been pretty careless with many of the issues in this series. Often they haven't even bothered to use the best transfers that they've issued previously.


----------



## JB Henson

Noticed I haven't contributed to this thread yet...I think...

VINYL:

Karajan 1960s
Schmidt-Isserstedt (London, just the individual releases in a slipcase)
Steinberg (Sine Qua Non pressing)
Bohm
Szell
Solti (Chicago, 70s)

CD:

Karajan 60s
Karajan 70s
Harnoncourt
Szell


----------



## hoodjem

Does anyone else enjoy the Kletzki-Czech PO set on Supraphon Archiv?


----------



## RobertJTh

hoodjem said:


> Does anyone else enjoy the Kletzki-Czech PO set on Supraphon Archiv?


Hurwitz swears by it (but he's a Czech Phil nut) and what I've heard of it is impressive. Great woodwinds, so it's a good choice for people growing tired of HvK's strings-dominated sound.
Kletzki is a terribly underrated conductor, he conducted my all time favorite performance of Mahler's DLvdE too.


----------



## SanAntone

The new Nézet-Séguin cycle on DG with the Chamber Orchestra of Europe has both good sound and performances.












> This latest cycle is unique because it does not use the now standard Bärenreiter/Jonathan Del Mar editions; instead, they play the ‘New Beethoven Complete Edition’ published by G. Henle Verlag. There are few, if any, discernible differences in the first eight symphonies, but in the ninth there are substantial changes: the scherzo is only 559 bars long (versus the normal 954); text underlay is different in the final movement, and a recently re-discovered (and more active) contrabassoon part is used for the first time.
> 
> The opening minutes of Symphony No. 1 make it clear that these are historically informed performances, with strings using little, if any, vibrato, and winds balanced well to the fore. Timpani are struck with wooden mallets and the raspy brass colors suggest natural trumpets and horns. Accents have a sharp attack and quick decay; articulation is crisp, and textures are appealingly transparent. Beethoven’s metronome markings are mostly followed. (Classic Review)


I like all of this. YMMV


----------



## Nipper

hoodjem said:


> Does anyone else enjoy the Kletzki-Czech PO set on Supraphon Archiv?


It's probably one of my top ten favorite cycles. It has great character.


----------



## Rogerx

hoodjem said:


> Does anyone else enjoy the Kletzki-Czech PO set on Supraphon Archiv?


Thanks for the tip, will try it out.


----------



## Becca

SanAntone said:


> The new Nézet-Séguin cycle on DG with the Chamber Orchestra of Europe has both good sound and performances.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I like all of this. YMMV


_"but in the ninth there are substantial changes: the scherzo is only 559 bars long (versus the normal 954)"_

Huh ... 395 bars shorter seems like a radical change?? Did they cut out a repeat? And if so, what was the rationale?


----------



## Kreisler jr

559 is without the double bar repeats. It's still misleading because the dacapo is not counted either. In the past conductors have always been flexible wrt double bar repeats, from observing none to all or selectively or not in the dacapo etc. One should not claim this as a unique selling point...


----------



## muxamed

Jordi Savall's new cycle is quite breathtaking.


----------



## RobertJTh

muxamed said:


> Jordi Savall's new cycle is quite breathtaking.


I only know his 1994 Eroica, which is one of the most exciting HIP versions of that symphony, at least for me.


----------



## SanAntone

These are the sets I have been listening to recently:

Frans Brüggen/Orchestra of the 18th Century
John Eliot Gardiner/Orchestre Révolutionaire et Romantique
Emmanuel Krivine/La Chambre Philharmonique
Jordi Savall/Le Concert des Nations
Yannick Nézet-Séguin/Chamber Orchestra of Europe


----------



## N Fowleri

Hello Everybody!

Thank you for all the wonderful information, insights, and opinions.

I found this forum after I embarked on a project to see which Beethoven Symphony cycles I preferred and why. This was not so much for me to choose a "best" or even a "favorite," but to learn about the music and how performances could differ. I am also interested in differences in the recording technique and results.

Although I have listened to classical music, both live and recorded, off-and-on for many years, I don't claim to know much about it. I don't claim to have a good ear or any musical talent, whatsoever. In fact, my middle-aged hearing is definitely not all that it could be. Thus, I can have difficulty hearing the soft bits without turning the volume up so high that the loud bits are irritating. I will also add that I can get a bit compulsive, so I have bought quite a few sets in the last week.

Before my recent binge on Beethoven Symphonies, I bought the Brilliant Classics release of Blomstedt/Dresden, having seen positive reviews and finding it inexpensive. For better or for worse, that helped to set my expectations for what the symphonies should sound like. Even after listen to many other versions, I still think it's excellent and "balanced." Of course, I also realize that a person grows to like that with which they are most familiar. I am a bit picky about sound quality, yet find the sound quality on this set perfectly good, without excelling.

My father gave me a copy of Toscanini's NBC Symphony Orchestra 1952 Symphony #9 "Choral." The sound quality, frankly, does take a little something from it, but I like. Do I like it as much as some people rave about it? Probably not, but I don't think those people are insane (perhaps just raving?) 

I also had a copy of Munch/Boston SO recording of the #5 and #7. I think it is a great performance, and the sound quality is perfectly good. I got this as part of the Living Stereo set, which I understand had some quality remastering applied. I wonder why one doesn't hear that much about Munch?

Some years ago, I also bought a download of Vanska/Minnesota's Symphonies 4 and 5. I like them. They are very enjoyable. Somehow, they don't quite speak to me as forcefully as the Blomstedt.

On the subject of sets of only #5 and #7, I have recently acquired Carlos Kleiber's with the Wiener Phil. All I can say is, I get why people love these. They are fantastic. I am also super happy with the #5 and #7 by Honeck/Pittsburgh. Energetic, powerful, lively. Great sound. (I had previously enjoyed their Shostakovich #5 with Barber's Addagio.)

If anybody is still reading, here are the sets I just bought:

Barenboim/Staatskapelle Berlin: Wonderful, but doesn't knock my socks off, quite.

Karajan/Berlin Phil.: Still listening. Awfully good.

John Nelson/EOP: Some nice bits, but the 9th isn't one of them. (Price was low, so thought it might make good comparison piece.)

Adam Fischer/Danish Chamber: Wow, this is superb. Just love it. Have folks here to thank for that.

de Vriend/Netherlands SO: Another absolutely wonderful set; it moves me. Also thanks to folks' advice here (Can be had very cheaply from Qobuz.com [$5] or 7digital.com[$4])

Vanska/Minnesota: I bought the whole set. The more I listen to it, the more beautiful it is, but still lacks excitement for me. Sound is superb. I love all BIS recordings.

Immerseel/Anima Eterna: Now, my gosh, this is what I was looking for! I love the energy and the pace. I get emotionally involved with it.

Rattle/Berlin Phil.: I am not sure why this doesn't get more love around here. For a big sound, this delivers and gets my pulse up in a way that the Barenboim doesn't. Sounds fantastic.

Literally in the mail: Karajan 77, Jansons/SBR, Chailly/Leipzig Gewandhaus
In the shopping cart: Dausgaard, Blomstedt/Leipzig, Harnoncourt/COE, Kletski

So, I seem to like HIP, but not exclusively, by any means. Faster paces work for me.

In terms of more sets to try, I'm thinking Mackerras, but which one? Also, Szell/Cleveland, Gardiner, Norrington (which one?) Is there something out there that would be eye-opening after the above?

I am tempted by the Yannick because I've been to a number of his live concerts and enjoyed them, but the professional reviews have not been kind.


----------



## Merl

N Fowleri said:


> In terms of more sets to try, I'm thinking Mackerras, but which one? Also, Szell/Cleveland, Gardiner, Norrington (which one?) Is there something out there that would be eye-opening after the above?
> 
> I am tempted by the Yannick because I've been to a number of his live concerts and enjoyed them, but the professional reviews have not been kind.


Both the Mackerras sets are excellent but I have a personal, special liking for the more raucous and boisterous RLPO set. Szell is a classic big-boned set, Gardiner I like but some don't and the Norrington set you want, IMO, is the 2nd SWR one, not the poorly played LCP one. As far as the Nezet-Seguin set is concerned I got it last week (cos I collect Beethoven symphony cycles). I've had a quick listen and I'm not impressed up to now, tbh. The new Savall set is much, much better. Btw all my Beethoven cycle reviews are on here. This was the last one I did. The others are linked at the bottom of each review. You seem to be in agreement with many of the ones I like, interestingly enough. 









Merl's Beethoven Symphony Cycle Reviews Pt.17 (a...


Over the past few years I've wanted to revisit a group of cycles that Granate initially reviewed or have been flagged to me or I'd skipped over as they had made little or no impression on me, first time around. It's important to keep an open mind in life and discerning and devoted listeners...




www.talkclassical.com


----------



## N Fowleri

Merl said:


> Both the Mackerras sets are excellent but I have a personal, special liking for the more raucous and boisterous RLPO set. Szell is a classic big-boned set, Gardiner I like but some don't and the Norrington set you want, IMO, is the 2nd SWR one, not the poorly played LCP one. As far as the Nezet-Seguin set is concerned I got it last week (cos I collect Beethoven symphony cycles). I've had a quick listen and I'm not impressed up to now, tbh. The new Savall set is much, much better. Btw all my Beethoven cycle reviews are on here. This was the last one I did. The others are linked at the bottom of each review. You seem to be in agreement with many of the ones I like, interestingly enough.


Yes, I should have thanked you, in particular! I have seen your series of posts and found them extremely helpful. I probably agree with you because of your influence. 

I do have one question, though, specifically for you. You describe listening in your car. I love to listen to music in the car, but it's pretty tough with all the dynamic range in classical music. How do you manage? Also, do you know whether your car audio system is compressing the dynamic range or otherwise DSP'ing (Digital Signal Processing) your music. Could that have an effect?


----------



## Merl

Firstly thank you and I'm glad you found my reviews helpful. Lol, I don't just listen in the car. I played a lot of them in the car to get an idea of style, tempi, etc. I mainly review them through my hi-fi or headphones upstairs.


----------



## Manxfeeder

N Fowleri said:


> If anybody is still reading, here are the sets I just bought:


Of course we're still reading! Hearing others' opinions is kind of what we do around here.


----------



## N Fowleri

Merl said:


> As far as the Nezet-Seguin set is concerned I got it last week (cos I collect Beethoven symphony cycles). I've had a quick listen and I'm not impressed up to now, tbh. The new Savall set is much, much better.


I won't rush to get Nezet-Seguin then. Are you able to give a grade to Savall? If not, can you say whether it's still in the running for an A*?

I am now thinking perhaps I should buy Norrington (SWR), Skrowaczewski, and maybe Savall next? What did you think of Harnoncourt/COE? (Sorry if I missed it in your write-ups.)


----------



## Merl

Tbh, I got rather Beethoven symphonied-out after all those reviews and I've not revisited them much for a few years. I suppose it's about time I did a Beethoven review as I have 4 or 5 sets I could cast an eye over. I've played through the Savall set a few times and I like what I've heard but I've not spent enough time _really_ listening closely. Most people enjoy the Harnoncourt and it still sounds quite fresh (and you can pick it up super cheap these days) and it's a good cycle so go for it. I never reviewed all the sets as Granate (where is he these days?) reviewed a lot of the more familiar sets. I kinda picked up on the lesser-known ones. If you have a streaming service I'd listen there first as most are on there. Remember I'm just one voice and others have different opinions that are just as valid. I'm glad you like what I've recommended. I do tend to like 'different styles of the cycles from trad (Blomstedt Dresden) right out to quirky and brisk (Adam Fischer). Basically if it resonates with me I'm hooked. Very safe sets don't do a lot for me but I know they do for others and tbh there's few real duffers out there.


----------



## N Fowleri

I haven't actually listened to Ivan Fischer's Beethoven recordings, but I have enjoyed his Brahms, Mahler, and Stravinsky. In this video, I get a kick out of watching him share his love and admiration for Beethoven's symphonies. Obviously, with this video, he is targeting a general, rather than expert, audience. So, that's me.


----------



## jim prideaux

CfP....a 'budget' label!

And yet they recorded Mackerras with the RLPO ( a 'provincial' band?) performing the Beethoven cycle......and what a cycle it is!

I do not claim it to be the 'best' ( whatever that means) and no doubt it will be back on the shelf as I go back to Immerseel, Norrington, Harnoncourt ( and Paavo Jarvi!) but as I currently am listening to the 4th and 6th I find it difficult to imagine more involving and considered ( in a positive way) performances ( and the actual recording is really impressive)


----------

