# Help with Beethoven Symphony Cycles



## SixFootScowl

Because we don't have enough Beethoven symphony cycle threads on TC and because I am still confused. Additionally I am an ignoramus on music other than knowing if I like what I hear and being able to spiel off names of some composers and conductors that I am familiar with.

Somehow with 5 sets of Beethoven symphonies I still have the urge for more, but I want any addition to be significantly different than what I have. Also I am wondering if my present collection has enough diversity and if I may have two cycles that are too similar. I am talking HIP vs. non-HIP, original instruments vs. modern instruments, full orchestra vs chamber orchestra and in between, slow vs fast and in between, and any other significant variations I am unaware of. As for repeats, I don't know if I would ever notice the differences; I have heard about them and so far it has not caused me any concern or interest (other than abhorrence at the idea of a studio cut and paste job to add a repeat by duplicating a section). I am open to recommendations on what to keep, what to give away/sell, and what to buy. My preference is not to spend a fortune on a cycle unless it is phenomenal.

Anyway here is what I have.

Bruno Walter
Gunter Wand
Rene Leibowitz (digital download)
Hanover Band (more than one conductor)
Naxos set conducted by Edlinger except 3 and 6 conducted by Halasz

I will add that if I were to give a set away it would be Bruno Walter. For some reason I don't go back to that cycle. The rest I like.


----------



## Pip

Two recommendations 
Szell Cleveland or Karajan Philharmonia.
You will never hear LvB better played.
The new Warner remastering of the Karajan is a bargain and includes for the first time the recently discovered stereo version of the Ninth,as a bonus.
I find Szell's interpretations equally valid today as they were almost 50 years ago - superb.
The Philharmonia recordings defy their age - 60 years. Great playing, possibly the best of all.
I can't live without either of them.


----------



## Manxfeeder

I agree; Szell is great and not very expensive. I haven't heard the Philharmonia remastering, but the original monos are nice. Shucks, spring for another Karajan Beethoven cycle? I already have two . . .
Is this one still in mono?


----------



## realdealblues

My opinion would be get rid of Hanover Band and Naxos sets. Walter is excellent but if you really don't like it then ditch it.

Modern Instruments, Slower Tempos, Non-HIP
Klemperer - Slower Tempos, Unbelievable Clarity And Texture, If mountain's of granite could play Beethoven's music, it would sound like this.

Modern Instruments, Moderate to Quick (but not Metronome Markings quick)
This is where most sets are. Karajan, Bernstein, Blomstedt, etc. You have Wand so it kind of fills this spot. Szell is similar but as mentioned is worth picking up. Especially for like $10 new. Walter would be in this section but more moderate rather than quick.

Modern Instruments, Metronome Markings, Full Orchestra
Chailly - If you want to hear Beethoven by the Metronome Markings this is the set.

Modern Instruments, Fast Tempos, Chamber Orchestra
Jarvi - The 9th is weak because Chamber Orchestras can't seem do it justice, but the rest are excellent.

Period Instruments
I'm not a big fan of Beethoven on period instruments. Bach or Vivaldi I can understand but Beethoven was larger than life and by all indications from his own writings and advancements would have much preferred modern sized orchestras and modern instruments. If you must hear Beethoven the way he would have heard things back then simply because modern instruments didn't exist yet and he couldn't assemble large enough orchestras to really meet his ambitions then I would go for Gardiner.

Immerseel, Norrington I, Hogwood, Bruggen are other options but most of them just have too many duds for me.


----------



## omega

If you like performances on period instruments, you definitely have to try Gardiner's excpetionnal cycle - fast tempi, great vivacity, great new colors and sound of the orchestra: it changed my perception of Beethoven's masterworks! And cheap price, too...


----------



## SixFootScowl

Szell might be a good way to go. His Ninth is high on my list (among 40 Ninths), right up there with Fricsay.

It looks like Leibowitz falls into the Modern Instruments, Moderate to Quick (but not Metronome Markings quick) being on the quicker side. And I seem to like that, which may explain why I am not as enthused with the somewhat slower Walter. The NAXOS set seems to fall in here also.

Hanover Band is period instrument and a smaller orchestra and very distinctly different from the others. So that probably covers the Modern Instruments, Fast Tempos, Chamber Orchestra category or is close.

What I don't seem to have is something in the Modern Instruments, Metronome Markings, Full Orchestra category. Perhaps Chailly is the one for me to further investigate.

Oh, and the NAXOS set is worth keeping for the portraits alone (even though the one on the Ninth is rather morbid), but it also sounds pretty good and cost me all of 25 cents plus shipping:


----------



## KenOC

As always, I'll offer my little list, though it's getting a bit long in the tooth.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/richpub/syltguides/fullview/R1L1EGKNY1ZC8X/ref=cm_srch_res_rpsy_alt_4


----------



## Albert7

I wish that Sinopoli conducted a Beethoven symphony cycle. Here is his 9th: http://www.deutschegrammophon.com/us/cat/4534232


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Beethoven with _power:_ Immerseel. Especially if you like brass!


----------



## hpowders

Even though he apologized a few years after it was released, I find the Abbado Berlin set very fine. A lot of energy.
The only thing I don't like is he takes repeats in movement 3 of symphony number 5, which I find anti-climatical and unnecessary.


----------



## Guest

Szell/Cleveland is an excellent cycle, and I highly recommend it. It is also really cheap. I found most of the CDs in the bargain section at my local Barnes & Noble for ~$4 each (all have 2 symphonies/disc, except the 9th), and got what I couldn't find there off of Amazon.

An excellent modern cycle with modern instruments, but historic practices is Vanska/Minnesota on BIS. This is, by far, my overall favorite cycle. The sound quality is also spectacular.

For HIP, I will add to what everybody else has said - Gardiner. this is an excellent cycle in its own right, but also a great HIP cycle.

For novelty, give Immerseel/Anima Eterna on the Zig Zag label a try. HIP Beethoven on speed. It's not my favorite, but it is definitely unique.

Finally - Klemperer. It is slower than the rest. It is not graceful. It is ponderous at times. And it is magnificent. It is Beethoven for a more refined time.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

I can only add one more voice to several recordings:

Karajan/Philharmonia-1950s
Karajan/Berlin-1963
Szell/Cleveland Orchestra
Gardiner/Orchestre Révolutionnaire et Romantique
Beethoven's 9th-Ferenc Fricsay/Berlin


----------



## SixFootScowl

Of all the recommendations above and considering price, Gardiner seems the most likely fit for me, and is right at the top of Ken's list. I do like his Eroica, but really haven't heard the rest. Some of the other highly recommended, Chailly and Immerseel, are a bit too pricey for now.

Krips is on the other recommended's of Ken's list, and that can be had for a couple dollars. Where does that fit though, probably traditional of which I already have Walter and Wand. One commenter on Amazon says,


> Tempi are consistently fast, even in the tremendous Funeral March of the Eroica (Symphony 3). Where Karajan (1960's) needs more than 17 mins. for this movement Krips takes under 13!


I have Abbado for Mendelssohn's symphonies. But he would be in the same slot as Walter and Wand? gotta fill that metronome slot and Gardiner seems the way to go.

If only Fricsay had done a cycle--I love his Ninth. Szell's Ninth is very good also.

So far, if I am going to get another cycle, Gardiner seems the most logical choice.

For now I am revisiting my Walter set, which I got for $5 at a garage sale and had to repackage into a 6 CD jewel case. Did you even know they made jewel cases to hold 6 CDs? It works but is a bit awkward. It was apparently a budget set, came in 6 jewel cases, only one had inserts, a back tray, and a folded cover insert that is blank on the inside. Front and back of that cover insert:








This is definitely a wonderful cycle and I will keep it unless and until I find someone worthy of it as a gift.

My investment so far:

Bruno Walter: $5 garage sale
Gunter Wand: $17 Ebay w free shipping
Rene Leibowitz (digital download): 9 cents after a $1 deduction that they gave me
Hanover Band: $3 Amazon plus shipping, so $7
Naxos set: 25 cents Amazon plus shipping, so $4.24


----------



## Albert7

Tragically enough, Kleiber never did a complete Beethoven symphony cycle. His 5th and 7th symphony recording are landmark recordings. Energetic and heart-touching. And not over-intellectual like Sinopoli's approach.


----------



## SixFootScowl

I also have the Furtwangler WWII set that has symphonies 3-7 and 9. As it is not a complete cycle I did not list it. I think that one cost me $14, which is a bit much, but as it was a purchase from a real brick and mortar store (Dearborn Music), it was worth it as I do like to support my local music store too.

Hey, what about Zinman? Is he somewhat comparable to Gardiner?


----------



## hpowders

Yeah. A complete cycle by Carlos Kleiber could have been something special.....but he didn't....so I can't recommend it.


----------



## scratchgolf

For complete sets I own


























Szell/Cleveland
Bernstein/Vienna
Bohm/Vienna
Krips/London

I prefer the Bohm from this lot but own about 20-25 individual recordings of Beethoven Symphonies. None of my definitive recordings are found in these sets.


----------



## Albert7

scratchgolf said:


> For complete sets I own
> View attachment 57164
> View attachment 57165
> View attachment 57166
> View attachment 57167
> 
> 
> Szell/Cleveland
> Bernstein/Vienna
> Bohm/Vienna
> Krips/London
> 
> I prefer the Bohm from this lot but own about 20-25 individual recordings of Beethoven Symphonies. None of my definitive recordings are found in these sets.


How is the Szell cycle?


----------



## SixFootScowl

Here is a nice list comparing Beethoven Cycles that has several of my sets: Wand, Leibowitz, and Edlinger/Halasz. All three are rated moderate to high tempi. Given that and Hanover Band, it appears that I prefer faster tempi. Having just listened to the entire Walter cycle followed by most of Want (am in the 8th right now), I am finding that Wand has more energy, more life than Walter. I won't be listening to Walter any more. Next is the Hanover Band which I have been looking forward to. I am also thinking that perhaps I have a good assemblage of Beethoven cycles with these four, why look further.


----------



## hpowders

Florestan said:


> Here is a nice list comparing Beethoven Cycles that has several of my sets: Wand, Leibowitz, and Edlinger/Halasz. All three are rated moderate to high tempi. Given that and Hanover Band, it appears that I prefer faster tempi. Having just listened to the entire Walter cycle followed by most of Want (am in the 8th right now), I am finding that Wand has more energy, more life than Walter. I won't be listening to Walter any more. Next is the Hanover Band which I have been looking forward to. I am also thinking that perhaps I have a good assemblage of Beethoven cycles with these four, why look further.


I have so many Beethoven sets. It is the Wand set that I rate best overall in consistent quality.


----------



## csacks

I would recommend the cycle from Ferenc Fricsay on DG. His 9th is not that strong, but his 5th and 7th are very good. For a single 9th, go for Ormandy and the Philadelphia Orchestra or Karajan.
Chailly´s set as already been mentioned, it needs powerful speakers!! It is a tribute to the Heroic Period


----------



## csacks

Florestan said:


> Here is a nice list comparing Beethoven Cycles that has several of my sets: Wand, Leibowitz, and Edlinger/Halasz. All three are rated moderate to high tempi. Given that and Hanover Band, it appears that I prefer faster tempi. Having just listened to the entire Walter cycle followed by most of Want (am in the 8th right now), I am finding that Wand has more energy, more life than Walter. I won't be listening to Walter any more. Next is the Hanover Band which I have been looking forward to. I am also thinking that perhaps I have a good assemblage of Beethoven cycles with these four, why look further.


Floretan: This is just to say thanks for the link


----------



## SixFootScowl

csacks: Here is another link (also see KenOC's link earlier in this thread):

Find the Best Beethoven Symphony Cycles

Seriously, you don't think Ferenc Fricsay's Ninth is that strong? I found it to be the best out of 40 Ninths I have. The only other one I thought came close was Szell. Also if Fricsay has a complete cycle, I can't find it.


----------



## scratchgolf

albertfallickwang said:


> How is the Szell cycle?


The sound quality is good, not great. It's a decent set and certainly right for the cost. I'd recommend it for variety and options.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Florestan said:


> Here is a nice list comparing Beethoven Cycles that has several of my sets: Wand, Leibowitz, and Edlinger/Halasz. ...


And they give a decent rating to the Edlinger/Halasz set:


> 6. Edlinger, Halász: Symphonies Nos. 1-9. Zagreb Philharmonic and Czechoslovak Radio Symphony Orchestra, rec. 1988. A cycle from Naxos' early days (now on its super-cheap label, Amadis) that's competently-played, with moderate-to-high tempi but somewhat thin-sounding in parts. Michael Halász conducts in Nos. 3 and 6 while Richard Edlinger conducts in the rest. No. 5 is probably the best of the set but far from being my top choice. Sound quality is acceptable.


----------



## KenOC

Florestan said:


> Seriously, you don't think Ferenc Fricsay's Ninth is that strong? I found it to be the best out of 40 Ninths I have.


I was introduced to Fricsay's 9th recently, either here or on another forum. It's certainly a great performance, one of the very best IMO. He died at 48 and never did a Beethoven cycle. I seem to remember reading that his 9th, from 1958, was DG's first or second stereo recording. The sound, though, is quite good!


----------



## DavidA

hpowders said:


> Yeah. A complete cycle by Carlos Kleiber could have been something special.....but he didn't....so I can't recommend it.


Interesting that a guy like Kleiber gets worshipped by the critics for NOT making many recordings while they hate Karajan because he made (they say) too many! Perverse people!


----------



## SixFootScowl

DavidA said:


> Interesting that a guy like Kleiber gets worshipped by the critics for NOT making many recordings while they hate Karajan because he made (they say) too many! Perverse people!


There is some amount of controversy over Abbado's cycles. As I recall from much purviewing of Amazon comments yesterday, he did one in the 1980s in the traditional style, then in 2000 a HIP performance that was apologized for a year later as a new HIP performance was released with 8 new recordings and a remaster/remix of the Ninth from the 2000 set. I do think if I needed a HIP performance (not, since I have Hanover) the Abbado would be worth a look but which one?


----------



## KenOC

I'm open to correction but... There seem to be two earlier Abbado cycles, both with the Berliners and recorded in Rome at about the same time. The CD cycle is studio, and the DVD cycle (which is actually cheaper) is live. Both seem quite good.

I think some Amazon reviewers are confusing one or both of the earlier cycles with the later more HIP cycles, which I haven't heard.


----------



## SixFootScowl

KenOC said:


> I'm open to correction but... There seem to be two earlier Abbado cycles, both with the Berliners and recorded in Rome at about the same time. The CD cycle is studio, and the DVD cycle (which is actually cheaper) is live. Both seem quite good.
> 
> I think some Amazon reviewers are confusing one or both of the earlier cycles with the later more HIP cycles, which I haven't heard.


I most certainly could be mistaken and so too the Amazon reviewers. Anyhow, I would much prefer HIP with Abbado. I think where I am at is faster tempo traditional (Wand or Leibowitz) and not certain about the HIP. Gardiner's Eroica is fantastic and was the door into an obsession with all the symphonies for me.


----------



## KenOC

Florestan, I don't think you are mistaken. Just mentioning that the are two earlier Abbado cycles, from about 1980 to my recollection. While not tubby or slow, they're nothing like the more recent HIP cycles.

I mentioned the Amazon reviews because I was just going through them and getting plenty confused because everybody was talking abut different cycles in reviews of the same recording (the earlier CD cycle).

And good to see Liebowitz getting more frequent mentions! I assume everybody knows by now that his excellent cycle can be had for a buck.


----------



## hpowders

DavidA said:


> Interesting that a guy like Kleiber gets worshipped by the critics for NOT making many recordings while they hate Karajan because he made (they say) too many! Perverse people!


Neither of them made enough, as far as I am concerned. Karajan was coming into his own as an outstanding Mahler conductor. Would have loved a complete set from him.


----------



## DavidA

As far as cycles are concerned

Karajan 1963 and 1977 are complementary.

Kleiber's 5 / 7 is compulsary

Klemperer's are never less than interesting and outstanding sometimes

Chailly is disappointing.

Toscanini is compulsory historically but the recording quality is vile.


----------



## hpowders

DavidA said:


> As far as cycles are concerned
> 
> Karajan 1963 and 1977 are complementary.
> 
> Kleiber's 5 / 7 is compulsary
> 
> Klemperer's are never less than interesting and outstanding sometimes
> 
> Chailly is disappointing.
> 
> Toscanini is compulsory historically but the recording quality is vile.


Completely agree about the Chailly. I bought it on an ecstatic recommendation of a professional critic. Needless to say, I haven't taken this critic seriously ever since.

Yes. I bought two Toscanini cycles from the late 1930's-each promising unbelievably improved sound. Barely listenable.


----------



## DavidA

hpowders said:


> Completely agree about the Chailly. I bought it on an ecstatic recommendation of a professional critic. Needless to say, I haven't taken this critic seriously ever since.
> 
> Yes. I bought two Toscanini cycles from the late 1930's-each promising unbelievably improved sound. Barely listenable.


Critics are fashion conscious wallys! They fawn over something. Note Richard Osbourne was the only one who didn't go into ecstasies about Chailly and his speed machine!


----------



## hpowders

DavidA said:


> Critics are fashion conscious wallys! They fawn over something. Note Richard Osbourne was the only one who didn't go into ecstasies about Chailly and his speed machine!


Chailly's Pastoral is an absolute rape! Musical graffiti! A walk in the country becomes a marathon run!!

I would never trust that critic's recommendations ever again!


----------



## DavidA

hpowders said:


> Chailly's Pastoral is an absolute rape! Musical graffiti! A walk in the country becomes a marathon run!!
> 
> I would never trust that critic's recommendations ever again!


The Pastoral is a trip on a 750cc motor bike!


----------



## DavidA

Karajan's 1983 cycle can be bought second hand on Amazon for less than a fiver! I haven't got it because I have the other two cycles and it does';t really add anything. But a great bargain!


----------



## SixFootScowl

KenOC said:


> Florestan, I don't think you are mistaken. Just mentioning that the are two earlier Abbado cycles, from about 1980 to my recollection. While not tubby or slow, they're nothing like the more recent HIP cycles.
> 
> And good to see Liebowitz getting more frequent mentions! I assume everybody knows by now that his excellent cycle can be had for a buck.


I would only be mistaken insofar as the reviewers I was going off of were mistaken. Anyway, nice to know we can have it both ways with Abbado, but I seem to be pretty well set now. I have been listening to Leibowitz tonight and he has all the speed I need. I like it very much but would not want it to be my only cycle. I will still go back to Wand if I could only have one cycle ever.

I think it was you who posted about the wonderful deal on Leibowitz and I also saw your handy review on Amazon discussing the details of the rest of the set. Thanks.


----------



## KenOC

Florestan said:


> I think it was you who posted about the wonderful deal on Leibowitz and I also saw your handy review on Amazon discussing the details of the rest of the set. Thanks.


I am cheap. Cheaper than cheap. I LOVE cheap. When I see a deal like the Liebowitz I enthuse for days, weeks even. CHEAP is where it's at!

BTW old-timers, did you know you could get the Walter Beethoven cycle in the nice Sony remasters for nine bucks? Yes, the 4th, 6th, and all the rest? Did I say CHEAP?

http://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-Vol...&sr=1-12&keywords=beethoven+symphonies+walter


----------



## SixFootScowl

KenOC said:


> I am cheap. Cheaper than cheap. I LOVE cheap. When I see a deal like the Liebowitz I enthuse for days, weeks even. CHEAP is where it's at!


Too good of a deal to pass up. I even had a $1 credit that Amazon gave me for some reason. I didn't know about it but the receipt came up for 9 cents! Nice, the whole Leibowitz cycle and dozens of other tracks for 9 cents!


----------



## KenOC

Florestan said:


> Too good of a deal to pass up. I even had a $1 credit that Amazon gave me for some reason. I didn't know about it but the receipt came up for 9 cents! Nice, the whole Leibowitz cycle and dozens of other tracks for 9 cents!


For those who eschew cheapism, you can get the Liebowitz cycle on CD for $72.95.

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


----------



## csacks

Florestan said:


> csacks: Here is another link (also see KenOC's link earlier in this thread):
> 
> Find the Best Beethoven Symphony Cycles
> 
> Seriously, you don't think Ferenc Fricsay's Ninth is that strong? I found it to be the best out of 40 Ninths I have. The only other one I thought came close was Szell. Also if Fricsay has a complete cycle, I can't find it.


Thanks for the new link
I do have a problem with the Choral Symphony. I love it. It is the first thing that I listen every time I buy a new musical device. Eugene Ormandy´s version (the old one, from CBS´ Great Performances), is my gold standard. Everything not like that is odd and it needs some work to get used to it.







In Fricsay´s set, the orchestra is magnificent (like always with Fricsay), but I think that voices are not that good, probably because a recording problem.

This is the set, not only about Beethoven, but included in the Complete Recordings in DG. All of them are included


----------



## Triplets

Florestan said:


> Because we don't have enough Beethoven symphony cycle threads on TC and because I am still confused. Additionally I am an ignoramus on music other than knowing if I like what I hear and being able to spiel off names of some composers and conductors that I am familiar with.
> 
> Somehow with 5 sets of Beethoven symphonies I still have the urge for more, but I want any addition to be significantly different than what I have. Also I am wondering if my present collection has enough diversity and if I may have two cycles that are too similar. I am talking HIP vs. non-HIP, original instruments vs. modern instruments, full orchestra vs chamber orchestra and in between, slow vs fast and in between, and any other significant variations I am unaware of. As for repeats, I don't know if I would ever notice the differences; I have heard about them and so far it has not caused me any concern or interest (other than abhorrence at the idea of a studio cut and paste job to add a repeat by duplicating a section). I am open to recommendations on what to keep, what to give away/sell, and what to buy. My preference is not to spend a fortune on a cycle unless it is phenomenal.
> 
> Anyway here is what I have.
> 
> Bruno Walter
> Gunter Wand
> Rene Leibowitz (digital download)
> Hanover Band (more than one conductor)
> Naxos set conducted by Edlinger except 3 and 6 conducted by Halasz
> 
> I will add that if I were to give a set away it would be Bruno Walter. For some reason I don't go back to that cycle. The rest I like.


You haven't scratched the surface yet. When you hear some cycles conducted by important Conductors, get back to us with some impressions. Walter is the only one you cited, and he was old and sick when he recorded his cycle. Try Szell, Karajan, Furtwangler, Monteux, Weingartner, Abbado, Toscanini,Haitink...most of the sets you died are D Level or worse.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Triplets said:


> You haven't scratched the surface yet. When you hear some cycles conducted by important Conductors, get back to us with some impressions. Walter is the only one you cited, and he was old and sick when he recorded his cycle. Try Szell, Karajan, Furtwangler, Monteux, Weingartner, Abbado, Toscanini,Haitink...most of the sets you died are D Level or worse.


 Certainly Wand is right up there with Monteux, Abbado, and Haitink in importance. Also, Furtwangler, Weingartner, and Toscanini are going to be difficult from a sound quality perspective, albeit, the great performances they are. If I were going to get any more traditional performances (such as Wand) certainly Szell would be a top choice. For Abbado, I am inclined to go for his HIP performance. We'll see. Never say never. I suspect there are more Beethoven symphony cycles in my future, but for now Wand is my reference, Leibowitz is my speed, and Hanover is my "and now for something completely different" Beethoven cycles.

It has been a productive thread for me, and I hope to hear more. Never tire of discussing Beethoven symphony cycles, or more so, hearing about them, since I am a novice.

Edit: Well I didn't get too far on those last notes above. I remembered when I recently went through my 40 Ninths that one of the new ones I had never listened to before was Szell. Now my favorite bar none is Fircsay. But Szell struck me as a competitor for the upper levels of greatness in Ninths. So today I decided to listen to both. Well I did not get very far into Szell's Ninth before I was searching out the whole cycle and, after listening to clips and reading some reviews, realized that to not get the Szell cycle at the paltry $9.09 new would be foolish. So, Szell is on it's way. I think it will replace all my cycles including Wand as the main one on my player. I can hardly wait! And it is much thanks to this thread where there were multiple recommendations for Szell, including your post, Triplets.


----------



## csacks

Any suggestion about Simon Rattle´s cycle with the Wiener Philharmoniker?


----------



## licorice stick

Certainly Vanska/MO as my overall favorite cycle.


----------



## Triplets

Florestan said:


> Certainly Wand is right up there with Monteux, Abbado, and Haitink in importance. Also, Furtwangler, Weingartner, and Toscanini are going to be difficult from a sound quality perspective, albeit, the great performances they are. If I were going to get any more traditional performances (such as Wand) certainly Szell would be a top choice. For Abbado, I am inclined to go for his HIP performance. We'll see. Never say never. I suspect there are more Beethoven symphony cycles in my future, but for now Wand is my reference, Leibowitz is my speed, and Hanover is my "and now for something completely different" Beethoven cycles.
> 
> It has been a productive thread for me, and I hope to hear more. Never tire of discussing Beethoven symphony cycles, or more so, hearing about them, since I am a novice.
> 
> Edit: Well I didn't get too far on those last notes above. I remembered when I recently went through my 40 Ninths that one of the new ones I had never listened to before was Szell. Now my favorite bar none is Fircsay. But Szell struck me as a competitor for the upper levels of greatness in Ninths. So today I decided to listen to both. Well I did not get very far into Szell's Ninth before I was searching out the whole cycle and, after listening to clips and reading some reviews, realized that to not get the Szell cycle at the paltry $9.09 new would be foolish. So, Szell is on it's way. I think it will replace all my cycles including Wand as the main one on my player. I can hardly wait! And it is much thanks to this thread where there were multiple recommendations for Szell, including your post, Triplets.


You are probably right about Wand. I have never heard his Beethoven and know primarily his Bruckner, with some Mozart and Brahms thrown in. I mean there must be cycles by over 200 Conductors out there and your initial list managed to miss most of the
Iconic ones.
My first cycles were Szell, Solti, Toscanini and Furtwangler. In that august company Solti seemed like the loser but in absolute sense he had a lot to offer. Nowadays fwiw I listen to Hogwood most frequently, for the HIPP playing, but still dip into the other dozen or so frequently.
So I envy you Florestan because you have a lot of great recordings by the greatest Conductors in recorded history to discover. Don't be afraid of mono sound, and see how Toscanini and Furtwangler move you...and let us know, because I am interested in your impressions.


----------



## Triplets

Just noticed that you have auditioned 40 Ninths. You are a serious listener. My favorite 9ths are Furtwangler (WW II) and Toscanini/NBC. Both hair raising intense, in totally different ways.


----------



## DavidA

csacks said:


> Any suggestion about Simon Rattle´s cycle with the Wiener Philharmoniker?


Some critics rave but nothing vonvinces me that he is a great Beethoven conductor


----------



## Triplets

licorice stick said:


> Certainly Vanska/MO as my overall favorite cycle.


The Vanska is my favorite SACD cycle (I also have Herrweghe and Masur). The Piano Concertos (3-5 so far) with Sudbin are also very good.
Zinman's cycle takes a lot of critical abuse, but I like it quite a bit.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Triplets said:


> Just noticed that you have auditioned 40 Ninths. You are a serious listener. My favorite 9ths are Furtwangler (WW II) and Toscanini/NBC. Both hair raising intense, in totally different ways.


 Some got a lot more playing time than others, and there are many good ones.

I have a Furtwangler WWII set of 3,4,5,6,7, and 9, but the sound quality is variable. I shall have to revisit both Furtwangler and Toscanini Ninths.


----------



## SixFootScowl

csacks said:


> Any suggestion about Simon Rattle´s cycle with the Wiener Philharmoniker?


I don't know, but you can sample sound clips from all the tracks at the allmusic site. Here are the Rattle Beethoven Clips.


----------



## hpowders

Vanska's okay. So is Abbado/BPO. Overall though I still have to give the prize to Gunter Wand.


----------



## starthrower

Here's my one and only Beethoven symphony set. It's on vinyl. I got it by mail order back in the olden days for 10 dollars. Nice LPs in good quality sleeves. I like Karl Bohm. A couple years later when CDs came out, I bought no. 7 by Ashkenazy. Never liked it. I got used to Bohm's leisurely tempos.










If I ever buy a complete set on CD, it'll probably be Bernstein on DG.


----------



## scratchgolf

csacks said:


> Any suggestion about Simon Rattle´s cycle with the Wiener Philharmoniker?


I give Rattle's 9th two enthusiastic thumbs down. I never ventured beyond it.


----------



## Triplets

starthrower said:


> Here's my one and only Beethoven symphony set. It's on vinyl. I got it by mail order back in the olden days for 10 dollars. Nice LPs in good quality sleeves. I like Karl Bohm. A couple years later when CDs came out, I bought no. 7 by Ashkenazy. Never liked it. I got used to Bohm's leisurely tempos.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If I ever buy a complete set on CD, it'll probably be Bernstein on DG.


I own that set. Leisurely it is.


----------



## DavidA

scratchgolf said:


> I give Rattle's 9th two enthusiastic thumbs down. I never ventured beyond it.


Heard him conduct it at a prom. He should stick to Mahler!


----------



## hpowders

Never liked Rattle in anything.


----------



## TheOtherStrauss

Nothing new to post. My recommendations: 
Szell/Cleveland Orchestra
Gardiner/Orchestre Révolutionnaire et Romantique

Gardiner - the speed of his Eroica actually sounds heroic and is electric...unlike the Karajan (1963), sounds like the orchestra is swimming through molasses


----------



## Mahlerian

DavidA said:


> Heard him conduct it at a prom. He should stick to Mahler!


No, please! He's horrible at that too. I don't know what his forte is, but I haven't discovered it.


----------



## SixFootScowl

TheOtherStrauss said:


> Nothing new to post. My recommendations:
> Szell/Cleveland Orchestra
> Gardiner/Orchestre Révolutionnaire et Romantique
> 
> Gardiner - the speed of his Eroica actually sounds heroic and is electric...unlike the Karajan (1963), sounds like the orchestra is swimming through molasses


Nothing new, but certainly lends support to a couple of great cycles. I have no doubt that Gardiner is wonderful, at least his Eroica is fantastic and was what I listened to incessantly for about a week last January on my Florida trip.

So far Wand is the top in my collection and my hope is that the Szell cycle I ordered will not replace Wand but compliment it. Hanover is just different, very different, but that is the beauty of it. Leibowitz is fantastic, but perhaps at times a bit too fast. The Naxos set is a competent rendition of the symphonies but more worth keeping for the Beethoven portraits on the CDs. Walter is going to be sold or gifted if/when I find the right person.

Keep the thoughts and recommendations coming in because none of us is ever done considering Beethoven symphony cycles.


----------



## SixFootScowl

As for Furtwangler, how about some recommendations on this set that I own. 
Are these the best performances of each of the 6 presented symphonies? 
Which of these six are particularly good.


----------



## DiesIraeCX

TheOtherStrauss said:


> Nothing new to post. My recommendations:
> Szell/Cleveland Orchestra
> Gardiner/Orchestre Révolutionnaire et Romantique
> 
> Gardiner - the speed of his Eroica actually sounds heroic and is electric...unlike the Karajan (1963), sounds like the orchestra is swimming through molasses


Yeah, I completely agree about Gardiner's Eroica symphony, it is electric. Florestan, if you like Gardiner's interpretation, you should also try David Zinman's with the Tonhalle Zurich Orchester. I think it's just as great as Gardiner's, but with a modern instruments (in the case you're not a fan of period instruments). There is an amazing clarity in Zinman's recording.


----------



## Triplets

Florestan said:


> As for Furtwangler, how about some recommendations on this set that I own.
> Are these the best performances of each of the 6 presented symphonies?
> Which of these six are particularly good.


 Those (Furtwangler) are great 3 and 9. Both are the most inense versions of their respective symphonies that I am aware of. The Erocia was my introduction to the work and I have never heard another that rivals it.
Gardiner's set never did it for me. Perhaps my Piano Teacher that insisted I had to love it produced an antipathy but when I borrowed it from her i thought it was merely hectic and squally sounding. I realize this is a minority view.


----------



## hpowders

Triplets said:


> I own that set. Leisurely it is.


That was the "old-fashioned" way to conduct Beethoven and Mozart in the 1950's-1960's.

Times have changed.

Klemperer too. So damn sluggish. Yet at one time, they were highly rated.


----------



## Itullian

hpowders said:


> That was the "old-fashioned" way to conduct Beethoven and Mozart in the 1950's-1960's.
> 
> Times have changed.
> 
> Klemperer too. So damn sluggish. Yet at one time, *they were highly rated*.


Still are to me. :tiphat:


----------



## Triplets

hpowders said:


> That was the "old-fashioned" way to conduct Beethoven and Mozart in the 1950's-1960's.
> 
> Times have changed.
> 
> Klemperer too. So damn sluggish. Yet at one time, they were highly rated.


Klemperer is slow, no doubt, and sometimes fatally so, but still manages to impart a sense of majesty and granduer. Bohm is just a pokey.


----------



## SixFootScowl

DiesIraeVIX said:


> Yeah, I completely agree about Gardiner's Eroica symphony, it is electric. Florestan, if you like Gardiner's interpretation, you should also try David Zinman's with the Tonhalle Zurich Orchester. I think it's just as great as Gardiner's, but with a modern instruments (in the case you're not a fan of period instruments). There is an amazing clarity in Zinman's recording.


I have a Zinman disc of Beethoven symphonies 3 and 4. Can't say I ever got around to listening to it. I guess I better do that.


----------



## KenOC

Florestan said:


> I have a Zinman disc of Beethoven symphonies 3 and 4. Can't say I ever got around to listening to it. I guess I better do that.


Zinman did a double disc of all the Beethoven overtures. I have them. Since he's a high-energy kind of guy, they're pretty good.

http://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-Com...79&sr=1-1&keywords=beethoven+overtures+zinman


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

hpowders said:


> That was the "old-fashioned" way to conduct Beethoven and Mozart in the 1950's-1960's.
> 
> Times have changed.
> 
> Klemperer too. So damn sluggish. Yet at one time, they were highly rated.


*Klemperer* was one of the _speediest_ conductors ever during his middle age and earlier! I find that slow tempos in Beethoven don't work as well for me. I find that the most successful recordings are ones which follow Beethoven's orchestra size and tempo. The balance and the clarity manages to show how incredibly busy Beethoven's orchestration is!


----------



## hpowders

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> *Klemperer* was one of the _speediest_ conductors ever during his middle age and earlier! I find that slow tempos in Beethoven don't work as well for me. I find that the most successful recordings are ones which follow Beethoven's orchestra size and tempo. The balance and the clarity manages to show how incredibly busy Beethoven's orchestration is!


Bernstein too slowed down as a senior conductor to the point of shapelessness and flabby tempos.

I have his final Boston Symphony Concert, his last ever and the performance of Beethoven's Seventh is shapeless, labored, and for me, painful to listen to. Sad, after the brilliance that used to be.


----------



## hpowders

Triplets said:


> Klemperer is slow, no doubt, and sometimes fatally so, but still manages to impart a sense of majesty and granduer. Bohm is just a pokey.


Yes. That's true. Klemperer was great. Bohm was a "kapellmeister".


----------



## Albert7

Dang it, now I really wish that Sinopoli recorded his version of Beethoven symphonies.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Wow! I just listened to Zinman's Eroica and it blew me away! I think I have room for one more cycle in my collection.


----------



## scratchgolf

Florestan said:


> Wow! I just listened to Zinman's Eroica and it blew me away! I think I have room for one more cycle in my collection.


There's always room for one more. Always!


----------



## realdealblues

hpowders said:


> Chailly's Pastoral is an absolute rape! Musical graffiti! A walk in the country becomes a marathon run!!
> 
> I would never trust that critic's recommendations ever again!





DavidA said:


> The Pastoral is a trip on a 750cc motor bike!


Again, I would point out that Chailly, like Zinman are going for Beethoven's own Metronome Marking. Christopher Hogwood and Roger Norrington from the Period Instrument crowd do so as well with only a few seconds difference between them.

This may be helpful to some, although keep in mind some recordings do not take the repeats which can skew the times. Here's some random track times I have on hand.

*Symphony No. 6*
_1[SUP]st[/SUP] Movement_
9:00 - Arturo Toscanini (1937)
9:01 - Herbert Von Karajan (1962)
9:08 - Herbert Von Karajan (1976)
9:09 - Erich Leinsdorf
9:09 - Herbert Von Karajan (1980's)
9:20 - Eugene Ormandy
9:31 - Herbert Blomstedt
9:51 - Bruno Walter
9:57 - George Szell
10:18 - Riccardo Chailly
10:24 - Andre Cluytens
10:24 - David Zinman
10:27 - Rudolf Kempe
10:30 - Christopher Hogwood
10:33 - Roger Norrington (1988)
10:43 - Roger Norrington (2002)
11:00 - Frans Bruggen (1985)
11:06 - Eugen Jochum (1977)
11:09 - Leonard Bernstein (1963)
11:13 - John Eliot Gardiner
11:14 - Paavo Jarvi
11:15 - Rafael Kubelik
11:18 - Claudio Abbado (2000)
11:30 - Frans Bruggen (2011)
11:32 - Wilhelm Furtwangler (1944)
11:37 - Osmo Vanska
11:38 - Rene Leibowitz
11:43 - Leonard Bernstein (1977)
11:46 - Georg Solti (1989)
11:52 - Arturo Toscanini (1952)
11:56 - Wilhelm Furtwangler (1952)
12:06 - Paul Kletzki
12:23 - Karl Bohm
12:31 - Colin Davis
12:58 - Kurt Masur
13:05 - Otto Klemperer
13:11 - Daniel Barenboim
13:23 - Gunter Wand
13:28 - Claudio Abbado (1988)

I'll throw in the 2nd movement times as well.
_
2[SUP]nd[/SUP] Movement_
10:23 - Herbert Von Karajan (80s)
10:46 - Riccardo Chailly
11:05 - Claudio Abbado (2000)
11:27 - Herbert Von Karajan (1976)
11:32 - Roger Norrington (2002)
11:33 - Arturo Toscanini (1952)
11:36 - Herbert Von Karajan (1962)
11:42 - Paavo Jarvi
11:48 - Rudolf Kempe
11:48 - Arturo Toscanini (1937)
11:55 - Bruno Walter
11:57 - George Szell
11:57 - Roger Norrington (1988)
12:00 - John Eliot Gardiner
12:04 - Osmo Vanska
12:05 - Daniel Barenboim
12:05 - David Zinman
12:09 - Gunter Wand
12:16 - Erich Leinsdorf
12:19 - Christopher Hogwood
12:22 - Eugene Ormandy
12:28 - Claudio Abbado (1988)
12:38 - Frans Bruggen (2011)
12:39 - Eugen Jochum (1977)
12:41 - Herbert Blomstedt
12:43 - Paul Kletzki
12:46 - Kurt Masur
12:53 - Rene Leibowitz
12:59 - Georg Solti (1989)
13:12 - Frans Bruggen (1985)
13:22 - Otto Klemperer
13:28 - Furtwangler (1944)
13:28 - Furtwangler (1952)
13:29 - Leonard Bernstein (1977)
13:46 - Leonard Bernstein (1963)
13:50 - Andre Cluytens
13:53 - Colin Davis
14:01 - Karl Bohm
14:26 - Rafael Kubelik


----------



## SixFootScowl

thank you realdealblues. That is excellent info (taken with the caveat about repeats of course).


----------



## leroy

Just a quick note on Gardiner, he recorded the 5th and 7th symphony at Carnegie hall in 2011 those are really excellent, better than in his earlier set I think.


----------



## realdealblues

Florestan said:


> thank you realdealblues. That is excellent info (taken with the caveat about repeats of course).


Yeah, you can kind of guess about the repeats. Many older Conductors didn't take them, you've heard Bruno Walter and you know he isn't a speed demon per say so he obviously didn't take the 1st Movement Repeat because the track time is 9 minute and 51 seconds. George Szell and Herbert Von Karajan skipped the 1st movement repeat as well.

Chailly, Zinman, Hogwood & Norrington are your Metronome Marker guys taking the repeat so you can see the fastest times for taking the 1st movement with the repeat are roughly 10 minutes 20-30 seconds.

You can also see older conductors like Rudolf Kempe & Andre Cluytens who didn't take the repeat either but it took them roughly 10 minutes and 30 seconds to get through what Karajan did in 9:01.

Gunter Wand who we think of as kind of speedy took the repeat and is at 13:23. By contrast, Karl Bohm (whom everyone thinks of as a slow poke) and his highly revered recording takes 12:23 with the 1st movement repeat included. So you can see with the repeat can take anywhere between 10:20-13:20.


----------



## DavidA

Everyone should hear Glenn Gould's somewhat miraculous account of the Pastoral on the piano in Liszt's arrangement. So slow speeds but he holds it together somehow!


----------



## DavidA

Frankly it's a bit of a pointless exercise comparing timings if you don't know who p[ut the repeat in!


----------



## realdealblues

DavidA said:


> Frankly it's a bit of a pointless exercise comparing timings if you don't know who p[ut the repeat in!


That's why I tried to give several examples of who did and who didn't. If I get some time this week maybe I'll add "repeat/no repeat" behind each track time or someone else is welcome to add that info if they are so inclined.


----------



## SixFootScowl

realdealblues said:


> That's why I tried to give several examples of who did and who didn't. If I get some time this week maybe I'll add "repeat/no repeat" behind each track time or someone else is welcome to add that info if they are so inclined.


It might be better to standardize these, say delete a percentage of time for those that take the repeat (and note that was done with a *), assuming that the repeat generally is a proportion of the whole movement. That way one does not have to try to figure the length of the repeat for each different conductor's speed.


----------



## hpowders

Yeah but one performance does not a successful set make.


----------



## realdealblues

Florestan said:


> It might be better to standardize these, say delete a percentage of time for those that take the repeat (and note that was done with a *), assuming that the repeat generally is a proportion of the whole movement. That way one does not have to try to figure the length of the repeat for each different conductor's speed.


I would probably just separate them into 2 groups, those who took the repeat and those who didn't. That way you can see what the longest and shortest times are for both no repeat, and repeat taken.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

I tend to avoid recordings with the repeats omitted.


----------



## hpowders

Some go overboard as does Abbado in the third movement of Beethoven 5. No need for repeats in that movement.


----------



## SixFootScowl

realdealblues said:


> I would probably just separate them into 2 groups, those who took the repeat and those who didn't. That way you can see what the longest and shortest times are for both no repeat, and repeat taken.


That is a much simpler way to do it. Then I can always add a correction factor. Also, depending where you get the times from, there could be error from the stated time and actual as there may be dead space at either end of the track or worse, half a minute of applause (though that would not be expected until the end of the 4th movement).

Or we can look at it graphically. And that has sort of been done already. I found an old, but fascintaing article that has graphs of duration and tempo for various works and composers, including a number of graphs for Beethoven.
_Tempo, Duration, and Flexibility: Techniques in the Analysis of Performance_


----------



## DiesIraeCX

Florestan said:


> Wow! I just listened to Zinman's Eroica and it blew me away! I think I have room for one more cycle in my collection.


Glad you enjoyed it, Florestan. To my ears, it's one of the great "Eroica" recordings. I still enjoy Karajan's 1963 Eroica, but after hearing Zinman (and Gardiner), it just changed my perspective and how it "should" sound. The funeral march actually sounds like a "March", the 1st movement is appropriately heroic, the 3rd and 4th movements are brimming with electricity!



ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> I tend to avoid recordings with the repeats omitted.


For the most part I agree with you, but for some works, I think the repeats are "unnecessary" (to me). For instance, I think the Finale of Beethoven's 5th is better without the repeats. It sufficiently makes its point without them. Same goes for Beethoven's 7th and Schubert's 9th (Sorry scratchgolf! Don't hate me, haha)

However, for other works I enjoy the repeats, like Schubert's 8th "Unfinished" and the 2nd movement of Beethoven's 9th.


----------



## scratchgolf

DiesIraeVIX said:


> Glad you enjoyed it, Florestan. To my ears, it's one of the great "Eroica" recordings. I still enjoy Karajan's 1963 Eroica, but after hearing Zinman (and Gardiner), it just changed my perspective and how it "should" sound. The funeral march actually sounds like a "March", the 1st movement is appropriately heroic, the 3rd and 4th movements are brimming with electricity!
> 
> For the most part I agree with you, but for some works, I think the repeats are "unnecessary" (to me). For instance, I think the Finale of Beethoven's 5th is better without the repeats. It sufficiently makes its point without them. Same goes for Beethoven's 7th and Schubert's 9th (Sorry scratchgolf! Don't hate me, haha)
> 
> However, for other works I enjoy the repeats, like Schubert's 8th "Unfinished" and the 2nd movement of Beethoven's 9th.


Interestingly enough, the only piece I prefer without repeats is Beethoven 9. The 2nd movement repeat sounds like the record skipped and the movement started over. Needless to say, Schubert 9 and Beethoven 5 are essential repeats for me :trp:


----------



## hpowders

Jjj


realdealblues said:


> Again, I would point out that Chailly, like Zinman are going for Beethoven's own Metronome Marking. Christopher Hogwood and Roger Norrington from the Period Instrument crowd do so as well with only a few seconds difference between them.
> 
> This may be helpful to some, although keep in mind some recordings do not take the repeats which can skew the times. Here's some random track times I have on hand.
> 
> *Symphony No. 6*
> _1[SUP]st[/SUP] Movement_
> 9:00 - Arturo Toscanini (1937)
> 9:01 - Herbert Von Karajan (1962)
> 9:08 - Herbert Von Karajan (1976)
> 9:09 - Erich Leinsdorf
> 9:09 - Herbert Von Karajan (1980's)
> 9:20 - Eugene Ormandy
> 9:31 - Herbert Blomstedt
> 9:51 - Bruno Walter
> 9:57 - George Szell
> 10:18 - Riccardo Chailly
> 10:24 - Andre Cluytens
> 10:24 - David Zinman
> 10:27 - Rudolf Kempe
> 10:30 - Christopher Hogwood
> 10:33 - Roger Norrington (1988)
> 10:43 - Roger Norrington (2002)
> 11:00 - Frans Bruggen (1985)
> 11:06 - Eugen Jochum (1977)
> 11:09 - Leonard Bernstein (1963)
> 11:13 - John Eliot Gardiner
> 11:14 - Paavo Jarvi
> 11:15 - Rafael Kubelik
> 11:18 - Claudio Abbado (2000)
> 11:30 - Frans Bruggen (2011)
> 11:32 - Wilhelm Furtwangler (1944)
> 11:37 - Osmo Vanska
> 11:38 - Rene Leibowitz
> 11:43 - Leonard Bernstein (1977)
> 11:46 - Georg Solti (1989)
> 11:52 - Arturo Toscanini (1952)
> 11:56 - Wilhelm Furtwangler (1952)
> 12:06 - Paul Kletzki
> 12:23 - Karl Bohm
> 12:31 - Colin Davis
> 12:58 - Kurt Masur
> 13:05 - Otto Klemperer
> 13:11 - Daniel Barenboim
> 13:23 - Gunter Wand
> 13:28 - Claudio Abbado (1988)
> 
> I'll throw in the 2nd movement times as well.
> _
> 2[SUP]nd[/SUP] Movement_
> 10:23 - Herbert Von Karajan (80s)
> 10:46 - Riccardo Chailly
> 11:05 - Claudio Abbado (2000)
> 11:27 - Herbert Von Karajan (1976)
> 11:32 - Roger Norrington (2002)
> 11:33 - Arturo Toscanini (1952)
> 11:36 - Herbert Von Karajan (1962)
> 11:42 - Paavo Jarvi
> 11:48 - Rudolf Kempe
> 11:48 - Arturo Toscanini (1937)
> 11:55 - Bruno Walter
> 11:57 - George Szell
> 11:57 - Roger Norrington (1988)
> 12:00 - John Eliot Gardiner
> 12:04 - Osmo Vanska
> 12:05 - Daniel Barenboim
> 12:05 - David Zinman
> 12:09 - Gunter Wand
> 12:16 - Erich Leinsdorf
> 12:19 - Christopher Hogwood
> 12:22 - Eugene Ormandy
> 12:28 - Claudio Abbado (1988)
> 12:38 - Frans Bruggen (2011)
> 12:39 - Eugen Jochum (1977)
> 12:41 - Herbert Blomstedt
> 12:43 - Paul Kletzki
> 12:46 - Kurt Masur
> 12:53 - Rene Leibowitz
> 12:59 - Georg Solti (1989)
> 13:12 - Frans Bruggen (1985)
> 13:22 - Otto Klemperer
> 13:28 - Furtwangler (1944)
> 13:28 - Furtwangler (1952)
> 13:29 - Leonard Bernstein (1977)
> 13:46 - Leonard Bernstein (1963)
> 13:50 - Andre Cluytens
> 13:53 - Colin Davis
> 14:01 - Karl Bohm
> 14:26 - Rafael Kubelik


All I know is what my ears tell me after over 50 years of listening to the Pastoral and that is Chailly sounds all wrong. His is the least moving version I have ever heard.


----------



## DiesIraeCX

scratchgolf said:


> Interestingly enough, the only piece I prefer without repeats is Beethoven 9. The 2nd movement repeat sounds like the record skipped and the movement started over. Needless to say, Schubert 9 and Beethoven 5 are essential repeats for me :trp:


A more appropriate emoticon could not have been used! Spot on! :tiphat:


----------



## SixFootScowl

What really amazed me in Zinman's Eroica was the first 2 minutes of the 4th movement, particularly from 1:20 to 1:50 where he has a single violin playing the lead melody. All the other Eroicas I have use multiple violins. Zinman's Erocia sounds like chamber music for that first 2 minutes. I would guess that is not going to be the case with Gardiner, but perhaps Joshua Bell does it that way?


----------



## Skilmarilion

Mahlerian said:


> No, please! He's horrible at that too. I don't know what his forte is, but I haven't discovered it.


Are you sure you haven't mixed him up with Norrington? 

I don't think Rattle's all that bad when it comes to Mahler. I like his 3rd with Birmingham. I recently borrowed his 9th with Berlin from the library recently and, whilst it didn't blow me away, I found it enjoyable (although much of the first movement feels more adagio than andante comodo).


----------



## hpowders

Yeah. Another horrible Pastoral plus an awful Ninth from Norrington at the beginning of the HIP craze. He turned the great 9th's adagio, practically into a waltz!


----------



## SixFootScowl

Ok so I have 1/3 of the Zinman Cycle (3,4, and 9). Do I 

A) get the complete cycle in a set? 

B) get one more disc, and if so, what next, what else is outstanding in his cycle?

C) stay put with the three I have and be happy?

Another kink in the works: What about Zander? I have his Ninth. Don't think he has done a cycle though.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Oops, couldn't help myself. Just nailed this on Amazon. Includes a second 
disc explaining his approach to each movement of both symphonies.









Clips are HERE and an ARTICLE.


----------



## realdealblues

hpowders said:


> Jjj
> 
> All I know is what my ears tell me after over 50 years of listening to the Pastoral and that is Chailly sounds all wrong. His is the least moving version I have ever heard.


That's cool. There are several I feel are far worse, but I just want people to understand Beethoven wrote out Metronome Markers and while some people like them, many people don't. I think each person should listen to both extremes and judge for themselves what they like.

I know you and DavidA both are not fans of the Chailly cycle, and while I agree his 6th is not my favorite recording either, many of the other symphonies in his cycle I feel have perfect dynamics, phrasing and most of all playing from the Gewandhaus Orchestra that keep very much in tune with what many people feel Beethoven had in mind. Symphony #1 for example finally gets the attention and full power it deserves in what seems like the first time since the 1950's. It's very similar to Toscanini and Fricsay's accounts. They didn't treat it like a subpar work and neither does Chailly. Symphony #2 which hardly ever gets any attention sounds powerful and lively and far more mature than many accounts I can think of.

I just think everyone should experience all kinds of Beethoven. Massive, Lean, Fast, Slow, whatever and decide for themselves what kind they prefer. If someone listens to Chailly's 1st movement of the 6th and goes "Whoa! Way too fast" and then listens to Wand's 6th and goes "Whoa! Way too slow" well maybe they should check out someone like Leonard Bernstein or Osmo Vanska who are both somewhere in between. That's kind of where I was going with the track times.

If someone likes a recording they have but maybe they want to try another that's a little faster or a little slower it gives them a few ideas of whom they might enjoy. Or maybe they want to hear it without the repeat. Anyone below 10 minutes doesn't take the repeat so maybe Walter or Szell or Karajan is up their alley.

Florestan seems like he's trying to decide what kind of Beethoven he prefers so I'm just trying to throw out lots of options. Get on Spotify or Youtube, check out the faster times, check out the slower times, check out some HIP, check out some full modern orchestras. See what works best for you in each individual Symphony. That's my philosophy. My ideal Symphony Cycle isn't just one set from one conductor, but if I was going on vacation and could only take one set with me, I could easily narrow it down too a handful to choose from that I could be happy with for a few weeks or a few months.


----------



## hpowders

realdealblues said:


> That's cool. There are several I feel are far worse, but I just want people to understand Beethoven wrote out Metronome Markers and while some people like them, many people don't. I think each person should listen to both extremes and judge for themselves what they like.
> 
> I know you and DavidA both are not fans of the Chailly cycle, and while I agree his 6th is not my favorite recording either, many of the other symphonies in his cycle I feel have perfect dynamics, phrasing and most of all playing from the Gewandhaus Orchestra that keep very much in tune with what many people feel Beethoven had in mind. Symphony #1 for example finally gets the attention and full power it deserves in what seems like the first time since the 1950's. It's very similar to Toscanini and Fricsay's accounts. They didn't treat it like a subpar work and neither does Chailly. Symphony #2 which hardly ever gets any attention sounds powerful and lively and far more mature than many accounts I can think of.
> 
> I just think everyone should experience all kinds of Beethoven. Massive, Lean, Fast, Slow, whatever and decide for themselves what kind they prefer. If someone listens to Chailly's 1st movement of the 6th and goes "Whoa! Way too fast" and then listens to Wand's 6th and goes "Whoa! Way too slow" well maybe they should check out someone like Leonard Bernstein or Osmo Vanska who are both somewhere in between. That's kind of where I was going with the track times.
> 
> If someone likes a recording they have but maybe they want to try another that's a little faster or a little slower it gives them a few ideas of whom they might enjoy. Or maybe they want to hear it without the repeat. Anyone below 10 minutes doesn't take the repeat so maybe Walter or Szell or Karajan is up their alley.
> 
> Florestan seems like he's trying to decide what kind of Beethoven he prefers so I'm just trying to throw out lots of options. Get on Spotify or Youtube, check out the faster times, check out the slower times, check out some HIP, check out some full modern orchestras. See what works best for you in each individual Symphony. That's my philosophy. My ideal Symphony Cycle isn't just one set from one conductor, but if I was going on vacation and could only take one set with me, I could easily narrow it down too a handful to choose from that I could be happy with for a few weeks or a few months.


I'm sure you are aware that two recordings with similar movement timings can include one lousy performance and one great performance.

One reviewer from Fanfare always does the same damn thing. He reviews a performance then has to list all the movement timings of 3-5 competitive performances.
What this shows, I will never know. Says nothing about dynamics, phrasing, oboe vibrato, string vibrato, communication of composer's intentions, etc; One of the reasons I ain't subscribing to that rag anymore!

Timings tell a very small part of a much larger story.


----------



## jflatter

As I said on another thread recently, I can't believe that the Thielemann cycle doesn't get the props that it deserves. The Vienna Phil play their socks off for him and it isn't flabby Beethoven as some would believe. It came out around the same time as Chailly and as some have remarked here, that has been seriously over praised. Barenboim's set with Berlin (not the WEDO) is great as well if you want Beethoven in the old German tradition with very good sound.


----------



## Vaneyes

HvK 60's, Solti 70's, P. Jarvi 00's.

Related:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLY7GK5rwCN2pUbGSDcfWSIkF_rKEWzRRK


----------



## SixFootScowl

Well I upgraded my Sansa Clip from 8 GB to 20 GB storage by replacing the 4 GB microSD with a 16 GB microSD. That allowed me to put all my Beethoven Cycles on the player and so after listing to all of them again, I decided to give Wand another shot. I have to say that Wand is excellent! However, I do find him a bit slow in places. Hoping my Szell cycle arrives today.


----------



## SixFootScowl

So I listened to all my Beethoven symphony cycles for 9 days straight, then went through Mendelssohn's symphonies and string symphonies. After that I saw a live Messiah, so then listened to one of my Messiahs. Then my Szell Beethoven symphony cycle arrived and I started listening around 7 pm. I have no heard all but the 5th (the Ninth I had before) and an extremely impressed that this is the best Beethoven cycle I have ever heard of my cycles (Wand, Walter, Leibowitz, Hanover Band, and a NAXOs set). I guess from this point on, there is only one other to try and that would be either Gardiner or Zinman, and I lean towards Zinman.


----------



## scratchgolf

You can check out Bohm's complete cycle here with Vienna Phil
or go straight to the choicest cut here Beethoven 6


----------



## xpangaeax

realdealblues said:


> Modern Instruments, Metronome Markings, Full Orchestra
> Chailly - If you want to hear Beethoven by the Metronome Markings this is the set.


What do you think of Zinman in comparison to the Chailly? I've been listening to the Chailly a lot lately, however what I've heard of Zinman I might like more. Obviously it will boil down to preference, just seeing what you think.


----------



## realdealblues

xpangaeax said:


> What do you think of Zinman in comparison to the Chailly? I've been listening to the Chailly a lot lately, however what I've heard of Zinman I might like more. Obviously it will boil down to preference, just seeing what you think.


I think Zinman is "ok". He uses Jonathan Del Mar's Barenreiter edition which again I don't feel is really correct. Zinman follows the metronome markers for the most part with the exception of the final movement of the "Eroica". He adds a few things here and there that aren't really in the score so to speak, but I can over look most of it. He allows vibrato which is good because I don't buy into all the no vibrato crap. His 9th symphony is a big miss for me though. Like most others not using a full modern orchestra it just sounds wimpy. It doesn't have near the power or weight it should. Some of the others sound to "light and dainty" for me as well. Symphony 7 comes to mind. Those are my biggest gripes and I still think Chailly is by far the better set.


----------



## Andreas

realdealblues said:


> I think Zinman is "ok". He uses Jonathan Del Mar's Barenreiter edition which again I don't feel is really correct. Zinman follows the metronome markers for the most part with the exception of the final movement of the "Eroica". He adds a few things here and there that aren't really in the score so to speak, but I can over look most of it. He allows vibrato which is good because I don't buy into all the no vibrato crap. His 9th symphony is a big miss for me though. Like most others not using a full modern orchestra it just sounds wimpy. It doesn't have near the power or weight it should. Some of the others sound to "light and dainty" for me as well. Symphony 7 comes to mind. Those are my biggest gripes and I still think Chailly is by far the better set.


But that way, he does remain true to his conception, doesn't he? Personally, I think Zinman covers a wonderful middleground between the epic big sound and the lean HIP approach. The sound recorded in the Tonhalle is only a little bit too echoey, for my taste.


----------



## SixFootScowl

realdealblues said:


> I think Zinman is "ok". He uses Jonathan Del Mar's Barenreiter edition which again I don't feel is really correct. Zinman follows the metronome markers for the most part with the exception of the final movement of the "Eroica". He adds a few things here and there that aren't really in the score so to speak, but I can over look most of it. He allows vibrato which is good because I don't buy into all the no vibrato crap. His 9th symphony is a big miss for me though. Like most others not using a full modern orchestra it just sounds wimpy. It doesn't have near the power or weight it should. Some of the others sound to "light and dainty" for me as well. Symphony 7 comes to mind. Those are my biggest gripes and I still think Chailly is by far the better set.


Do you feel that Gardiner is any better than Zinman? I am quite pleased with Szell and think I will not buy more cycles for now unless a seriously great deal comes along.


----------



## realdealblues

Andreas said:


> But that way, he does remain true to his conception, doesn't he? Personally, I think Zinman covers a wonderful middleground between the epic big sound and the lean HIP approach. The sound recorded in the Tonhalle is only a little bit too echoey, for my taste.


In my opinion honestly no. It's true to what Beethoven had to work with at the time, but from all that I've read about Beethoven I believe his "conception" was on a much grander scale and had he had access to a modern orchestra he would have far preferred a modern approach.



Florestan said:


> Do you feel that Gardiner is any better than Zinman? I am quite pleased with Szell and think I will not buy more cycles for now unless a seriously great deal comes along.


Gardiner doesn't hit the metronome markers as often so it's a little bit of apples and oranges as far as that goes. I've honestly never been a fan of Gardiner. I'm not into the period strings when it comes to Beethoven. They sound thin compared to modern ones. People say you can hear more details with the Period Instruments and Chamber Orchestras, but I think that's a load of crap. That's the difference between a good conductor and a great conductor. Klemperer, Wand, Szell and Bernstein all achieved great orchestral clarity with full modern orchestras because they knew how to conduct them. I see Immerseel mentioned a lot for metronome and period instruments but the horns let his performances down not being able to hold pitches. If I had to go Period Instrument I'd probably take Bruggen.

But back to your original question. If it was me, I'd probably take Zinman because of the modern instruments and perhaps more allowance for vibrato. I've owned both but got rid of both because neither really satisfied me. Szell is an excellent cycle and so is Wand. To me you've got two of the best cycles. If the tempos feel correct to you, then I wouldn't go looking elsewhere unless you just really want to hear Beethoven played each possible way and have one recording of each.


----------



## Itullian

I gave my Zinman away.


----------



## SixFootScowl

realdealblues said:


> If it was me, I'd probably take Zinman because of the modern instruments and perhaps more allowance for vibrato. I've owned both but got rid of both because neither really satisfied me. Szell is an excellent cycle and so is Wand. To me you've got two of the best cycles. If the tempos feel correct to you, then I wouldn't go looking elsewhere unless you just really want to hear Beethoven played each possible way and have one recording of each.


I appreciate your advice and particularly your recommendation of Szell that others also recommended. If it weren't for this thread, I would not have Szell and that would be unfortunate.

Of the sets I have:

*Walter*: Great but rather slow, so a good give away set.
*Wand*: Wonderful, a keeper.
*Szell*: Superb if not perfect, a keeper. 
*Leibowitz*: Nice but perhaps seeming a bit rushed in places, at $1.09 digital download it's a keeper.
*Hanover*: Very different and worth keeping for variety, a keeper for the $2.99 I paid and includes the Missa and overtures.
*NAXOS*: Good but nothing special, so a good give away set.

Thanks to everyone for the great recommendations and advice.


----------



## Itullian

It's a lucky man that gets the Walter set.


----------



## KenOC

Itullian said:


> It's a lucky man that gets the Walter set.


Even a poor lucky man can afford it at nine bucks...


----------



## scratchgolf

Florestan said:


> I appreciate your advice and particularly your recommendation of Szell that others also recommended. If it weren't for this thread, I would not have Szell and that would be unfortunate.
> 
> Of the sets I have:
> 
> *Walter*: Great but rather slow, so a good give away set.
> *Wand*: Wonderful, a keeper.
> *Szell*: Superb if not perfect, a keeper.
> *Leibowitz*: Nice but perhaps seeming a bit rushed in places, at $1.09 digital download it's a keeper.
> *Hanover*: Very different and worth keeping for variety, a keeper for the $2.99 I paid and includes the Missa and overtures.
> *NAXOS*: Good but nothing special, so a good give away set.
> 
> Thanks to everyone for the great recommendations and advice.


Helping is one of the things that makes TC great. You certainly don't need the Bohm cycle but I highly recommend his 6th. I wish I had a way to share it with you for free. It's that good. I hope you continue to explore and enjoy this wonderful music.


----------



## SixFootScowl

scratchgolf said:


> Helping is one of the things that makes TC great. You certainly don't need the Bohm cycle but I highly recommend his 6th. I wish I had a way to share it with you for free. It's that good. I hope you continue to explore and enjoy this wonderful music.


Well, if I see the Bohm 6th sometime I may grab it.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

realdealblues said:


> I think Zinman is "ok". He uses Jonathan Del Mar's Barenreiter edition which again I don't feel is really correct. Zinman follows the metronome markers for the most part with the exception of the final movement of the "Eroica". He adds a few things here and there that aren't really in the score so to speak, but I can over look most of it. He allows vibrato which is good because I don't buy into all the no vibrato crap. His 9th symphony is a big miss for me though. Like most others not using a full modern orchestra it just sounds wimpy. It doesn't have near the power or weight it should. Some of the others sound to "light and dainty" for me as well. Symphony 7 comes to mind. Those are my biggest gripes and I still think Chailly is by far the better set.


Which do you think is the definitive edition of scores?


----------



## realdealblues

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Which do you think is the definitive edition of scores?


There is no definitive score, however I prefer the older scores like the Peters Edition published at the end of the 19th century. Del Mar's score is interesting, and it's good to compare with other editions, but it shouldn't be taken as the final word. Del Mar admitted he made corrections based on his own opinion as a musician. If something seemed out of place to him than it was probably an error and even he asked the question "how far should we accept what Beethoven wrote?" Well, he wrote it, maybe he knows what he was doing. Maybe Beethoven did make a mistake, who knows, but maybe he thought about something differently than Del Mar and it really did have a reason for being there.

In the end it's in the hands of the conductor to interpret, but I don't really like the idea of someone taking a score and saying, "well, this doesn't makes sense to me, I think Beethoven goofed so I'm going to change it to what I think it should be".


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

I just remembered this video, if anyone would care to judge a Beethoven 3rd on the first two chords.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

realdealblues said:


> There is no definitive score, however I prefer the older scores like the Peters Edition published at the end of the 19th century. Del Mar's score is interesting, and it's good to compare with other editions, but it shouldn't be taken as the final word. Del Mar admitted he made corrections based on his own opinion as a musician. If something seemed out of place to him than it was probably an error and even he asked the question "how far should we accept what Beethoven wrote?" Well, he wrote it, maybe he knows what he was doing. Maybe Beethoven did make a mistake, who knows, but maybe he thought about something differently than Del Mar and it really did have a reason for being there.
> 
> In the end it's in the hands of the conductor to interpret, but I don't really like the idea of someone taking a score and saying, "well, this doesn't makes sense to me, I think Beethoven goofed so I'm going to change it to what I think it should be".


Ah well that's very interesting, what would differences be in terms of the information on the page?


----------



## realdealblues

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Ah well that's very interesting, what would differences be in terms of the information on the page?


(from a discussion on the matter)

One example from Beethoven's 9th Symphony final movement:

Del Mar changed the note value after concluding that the dotted quarter = 84 for the Turkish March is "inconceivable" for the whole section of mm.331-594. But when Beethoven indicates
a metronome marking, is it sensible that any performer assume that Beethoven
would adhere to that tempo?

Roger Norrington (with his recording of the Ninth for EMI) is, to the best of my knowledge, the only conductor who has tried to do so and for this he has been severely criticized.

Del Mar suggests reasons for why it might be a mistake, and maybe he's right but maybe he is wrong and Beethoven did mean it.

For me, it opens up a can of worms. Where do we stop second guessing what Beethoven wrote? But more importantly, you now have a publishing company saying they're score is the more correct one because of course they have a product to sell.

Like I said, Del Mar puts forth interesting ideas and changes and has his reasons for making them, but I also feel more confident in a score published closer to Beethoven's time which many up to today have considered very faithful towards his intentions.


----------



## SixFootScowl

> George Szell's Beethoven Fifth exists in three versions: this one [Concertgebouw]; another with the Cleveland Orchestra on Sony; and (finest of all) one with the Vienna Philharmonic live from the Salzburg Festival on Orfeo.


From this review.

Your thoughts on these three versions?


----------



## DavidA

This whole thing on metronome marks is a can of worms. Even a modern composer like Stravinsky, when listening to Colin Davis' conducting of one of his pieces, said Davis was too fast. When Davis pointed he conducted it at Stravinsky's own metronome mark, Stravinsky said, "The metronome - it's just the beginning."
We are not sure whether Beethoven fully understood how a metronome worked, how his markings were effected by his deafness and whether indeed some of them are actually Beethoven's at all. I mean, the marked tempo for the Hammerklavier Sonata is way too fast technically.
To me it's better to have something that sounds at the right tempo rather than a version that races through slavishly obeying metronome markings is surely right.
Just listen to (e.g.) Klemperer conduct the Funeral March from the Eroica! Karajan once said to him he hoped one day to conduct it as well as Klemperer did.


----------



## Itullian

DavidA said:


> This whole thing on metronome marks is a can of worms. Even a modern composer like Stravinsky, when listening to Colin Davis' conducting of one of his pieces, said Davis was too fast. When Davis pointed he conducted it at Stravinsky's own metronome mark, Stravinsky said, "The metronome - it's just the beginning."
> We are not sure whether Beethoven fully understood how a metronome worked, how his markings were effected by his deafness and whether indeed some of them are actually Beethoven's at all. I mean, the marked tempo for the Hammerklavier Sonata is way too fast technically.
> To me it's better to have something that sounds at the right tempo rather than a version that races through slavishly obeying metronome markings is surely right.
> Just listen to (e.g.) Klemperer conduct the Funeral March from the Eroica! Karajan once said to him he hoped one day to conduct it as well as Klemperer did.


Agree .................


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

I found a fascinating article which says that Beethoven intended the March/scherzo section of the fourth movement of the 9th symphony to be 84 dotted _minims_ (half notes) to the minute, not dotted crotchets (quarter notes). http://www.benjaminzander.com/recordings/boston-philharmonic/beet9/review/130


----------



## KenOC

I've read a bit about the "Beethoven metronome" conundrum. I have no doubt that Beethoven understood the metronome quite well (he was a compulsive coffee bean counter after all) and wasn't at all impaired in that regard. There is some question over whether his nephew Carl, who transcribed some of his metronome timings, confused note values in certain cases, but that's hard to know.

But it may be (IMO) that the biggest problem was his deafness. When you hear a piece in your head, you generally hear it much faster than would be practical in a hall with its reverb time. Try this yourself, you don't have to be deaf! So perhaps some of his metronome markings are too fast for that reason.


----------



## Andreas

[Didn't belong here.]


----------



## realdealblues

Florestan said:


> From this review.
> 
> Your thoughts on these three versions?


I have all three. I agree that the live version has a touch more excitement which is often a by product of being a live recording. It is definitely Szell's best. The Cleveland Orchestra sounds different than the Concertgebouw but Szell's vision of the 5th itself didn't change much. Philips had a little better sound as far as the recording itself goes.

If you've got extra money and you love the 5th Symphony then knock yourself out and check out the live recording on Orfeo or if you want a really good Sibelius 2nd that comes with the Beethoven 5th on Philips you can pick that one up and compare as well. Do I feel you need to replace the Cleveland 5th from your box set with another, no.

Part of my love of classical music is comparing different recordings and seeing which ones connect with me where I can go "Yes!" that works! I look for a flow throughout each movement but also through the entire work. Sometimes things like tempo and phrasing are apart of that, sometimes not. It's one of those things I just "know it when I hear it".

Most people don't need 150 recordings of Beethoven's 5th Symphony. They walk into a store and see Karajan's 60's Cycle and buy it and that's good enough for the rest of their lives. Maybe they buy the Carlos Kleiber recording because they hear about it somewhere. That's not the kind of listener I am, but at the same time I don't expand out as much as some people do. I'm very sketchy after Mahler's time. I have some "Modern" stuff but I'm the first to admit I would have no idea where to begin if someone asked me what "Stockhausen" recording to buy. I still don't think I've ever heard Stockhausen for that matter!

So it just kind of depends on what kind of listener you are. I branch out little by little but my listening is dominated by about 15 composers: J.S. Bach, Beethoven, Bernstein, Brahms, Bruckner, Chopin, Dvorak, Haydn, Mahler, Mendelssohn, Mozart, Schubert, Schumann, Sibelius & Tchaikovsky. I have thousands of recordings from each of them and most of my time is spent comparing them.

Do you need another Beethoven 5th recording? Probably not. Would you like to hear and compare more versions because you really love that particular Symphony? Well, that's the big question...


----------



## SixFootScowl

Frankly, I don't have the ability to get fine nuances of so many recordings. I just know that my Szell Cleveland cycle sounds great. I don't need to replace it's 5th, but was curious about the other two being out there. In fact, I found the Concertgebouw version here for the downloading.

I already have plenty of 5ths with my several cycles and the Zander 5th that just arrived yesterday along with a Monteux 5th that came with a 9th I purchased (second disc was about 25 minutes of Monteux rehearsing the 9th and the 5th). The Zander set I just got is double disc. First disc is 5th and 7th. Second disc has extensive discussion of both symphonies with musical demos and discussion of the "Moonlight" sonata--fascinating!

"Do you need another Beethoven 5th recording? Probably not. Would you like to hear and compare more versions because you really love that particular Symphony? Well, that's the big question..." Yeah, I think I sometimes go overboard, such as buying 3 different La Sonnambula CDs besides having a 4th one on DVD. But it is fun.

Having looked over my 2014 purchases and seeing I have spent about $460 on music this year alone, I think maybe I should not buy so many more CDs as to simply enjoy the ones I have. Ah but it is nice to have CDs arriving in the mail almost on a weekly basis. This week though I took advantage to sign out a couple CD sets from the library: Sutherland arias, and Bach B Minor Mass.

Thanks for the input.


----------



## hpowders

What is logical to me is how the music sounds, whether it is convincing to me or not.

The first movement of Chailly's Pastoral sounds like the way those silent movies look-where everyone appears like they are running instead of walking.

Then I spin the Gunther Wand and I'm walking through a beautiful country park, glad to be alive, away from the bustle of the city.

I don't need a metronome to tell me the Chailly is all wrong.


----------



## scratchgolf

KenOC said:


> I've read a bit about the "Beethoven metronome" conundrum. I have no doubt that Beethoven understood the metronome quite well (he was a compulsive coffee bean counter after all) and wasn't at all impaired in that regard. There is some question over whether his nephew Carl, who transcribed some of his metronome timings, confused note values in certain cases, but that's hard to know.
> 
> But it may be (IMO) that the biggest problem was his deafness. When you hear a piece in your head, you generally hear it much faster than would be practical in a hall with its reverb time. Try this yourself, you don't have to be deaf! So perhaps some of his metronome markings are too fast for that reason.


You make a great point here. "Like"


----------



## SixFootScowl

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> I found a fascinating article which says that Beethoven intended the March/scherzo section of the fourth movement of the 9th symphony to be 84 dotted _minims_ (half notes) to the minute, not dotted crotchets (quarter notes). http://www.benjaminzander.com/recordings/boston-philharmonic/beet9/review/130


I have been reading Zander's notes on his Beethoven 5th and 7th symphonies that I just purchased. In fact he discusses them on a second disc in the set. I am beginning to think that if one wants to go with metronome markings that Zander may be the best one to go with over and above Zinman and Gardiner, but apparently Zander only has 5, 7, and 9 so far in his attempt at completing a cycle.


----------



## xpangaeax

realdealblues said:


> I think Zinman is "ok". He uses Jonathan Del Mar's Barenreiter edition which again I don't feel is really correct. Zinman follows the metronome markers for the most part with the exception of the final movement of the "Eroica". He adds a few things here and there that aren't really in the score so to speak, but I can over look most of it. He allows vibrato which is good because I don't buy into all the no vibrato crap. His 9th symphony is a big miss for me though. Like most others not using a full modern orchestra it just sounds wimpy. It doesn't have near the power or weight it should. Some of the others sound to "light and dainty" for me as well. Symphony 7 comes to mind. Those are my biggest gripes and I still think Chailly is by far the better set.


I see what you mean about the 9th, however the 3rd and 5th I really love Zinman for. I've been listening to the each back to back by conductor and I really find that Zinman's "breathes" more. I notice each instrument a little more, and this could also be due to the smaller scale orchestra. Chailly feels somewhere between a buzzsaw and sledgehammer (a feeling I am comfortable with, having been engrossed in metal music for my teens and 20's.)

You've mentioned in other posts that LVB would definitely prefer to use a full modern orchestra. Is this evident in any of his writings? I wonder, with all the scholarship done on these symphonies, questions of metronome marks, score authenticity, etc., where might this come into play? And, is there a point in his career at which it is clear that he would be writing for a bigger orchestra? What about a cycle that starts out with the smaller orchestra, as it were in the time, and morphing into a fuller, more modern one by the 9th?


----------



## xpangaeax

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> I found a fascinating article which says that Beethoven intended the March/scherzo section of the fourth movement of the 9th symphony to be 84 dotted _minims_ (half notes) to the minute, not dotted crotchets (quarter notes). http://www.benjaminzander.com/recordings/boston-philharmonic/beet9/review/130


I started reading this in the office earlier today, will pick up again tomorrow. Really, really good stuff.


----------



## jflatter

Could anyone recommend Kubelik Beethoven symphony set? Although I understand that they were recorded with different orchestras.


----------



## SixFootScowl

realdealblues said:


> I have all three. I agree that the live version has a touch more excitement which is often a by product of being a live recording. It is definitely Szell's best. The Cleveland Orchestra sounds different than the Concertgebouw but Szell's vision of the 5th itself didn't change much. Philips had a little better sound as far as the recording itself goes.
> 
> If you've got extra money and you love the 5th Symphony then knock yourself out and check out the live recording on Orfeo or if you want a really good Sibelius 2nd that comes with the Beethoven 5th on Philips you can pick that one up and compare as well. Do I feel you need to replace the Cleveland 5th from your box set with another, no.


I have been listening to my Beethoven 5ths all day long: Wand, Szell Cleveland, Szell Concertgebouw, Leibowitz, Hanover, Zander, Monteux, and Furtwangler, Walter. They are all very good. Walter and Furtwangler are rather slow at times. Leibowitz sometimes seems so fast as if notes are falling over notes. Monteux is fine. Hanover has a unique sound because of how they recorded it, and I like it, but not for my main cycle. Between Wand and the two Szell performances, I am feeling quite strongly that Wand's fifth is better, or should I say my preference.

I don't see my self buying any more cycles unless Zander completes one. Alas, the 5th and 7th were completed in 1998 and I see no others. He intended/intends to complete a cycle, but not sure when. I really like Zander's fifth and it is especially nice that I have a second disc where he gives detailed explanations with musical examples of how he approached the metronome markings vs the written Italian words for what tempo to use.

As a curiosity, I timed the first so many bars of the fifth for each conductor. The list shows times (in seconds according to the media player clock) for A (dah dah dah daaaa, 2x), B shows time for A plus a few more parts up to the next very long note--I can't tell you how many bars as I don't have the sheet music nor know how to read it, but here are the results (Sell Cleveland only):

Conductor: A-time : B-time (as explained above)
Walter: 11 : 27
Wand: 11 : 16
Szell: 6 : 19
Leibowitz: 6 : 17
Hanover: 8 : 20
Zander: 5 : 15
Monteux: 7 : 20
Furtwangler: 9 : 25

The results mean little beyond what the conductors do with the first 15 to 25 seconds of the first movement of the 5th symphony, but are interesting anyway. As Zander explains, conductors may run significantly slower or faster than the mentronome marks so without analyzing the entire symphony, one cannot say very much.

But it is interesting that Furtwangler and Walter really take it slowly. Wand, while pretty slow in A, must speed it up significantly to get the second shortest time for B; whereas Szell is much quicker in A and slower for B.


----------



## DavidA

xpangaeax said:


> You've mentioned in other posts that LVB would definitely prefer to use a full modern orchestra. Is this evident in any of his writings? I wonder, with all the scholarship done on these symphonies, questions of metronome marks, score authenticity, etc., where might this come into play? And, is there a point in his career at which it is clear that he would be writing for a bigger orchestra? What about a cycle that starts out with the smaller orchestra, as it were in the time, and morphing into a fuller, more modern one by the 9th?


I have no doubt that Beethoven would have preferred the best orchestra available. It is interesting to experiment with HIP to see what they might have sounded like but would Beethoven have preferred a HIP band to the Berlin or Vienna Phil? Doubtful imo


----------



## realdealblues

jflatter said:


> Could anyone recommend Kubelik Beethoven symphony set? Although I understand that they were recorded with different orchestras.


One of my favorites. Slower/Moderate tempos if you care about that, but each orchestra plays beautifully and Kubelik's vision of Beethoven is truly wonderful. He tried to pick orchestras where their individual sounds would often enhance certain aspects of the Symphonies themselves. It was sad that since it was on DG it kind of got lost and forgotten because of Karajan and Bernstein's star power.


----------



## DavidA

Been listening a bit more to Karajan's 1985 cycle. There are some really good performances even if they don't add too much to the rest of his cycles. I got it second hand via Amazon for about a fiver for the whole set so if anyone wants to investigate it can be snapped up cheaply!


----------



## Mahlerian

DavidA said:


> I have no doubt that Beethoven would have preferred the best orchestra available. It is interesting to experiment with HIP to see what they might have sounded like but would Beethoven have preferred a HIP band to the Berlin or Vienna Phil? Doubtful imo


You're probably right, but then he probably would have written in a different way to suit the new instruments and exploit their capabilities.


----------



## Lord Lance

DavidA said:


> Been listening a bit more to Karajan's 1985 cycle. There are some really good performances even if they don't add too much to the rest of his cycles. I got it second hand via Amazon for about a fiver for the whole set so if anyone wants to investigate it can be snapped up cheaply!


The 1985 Karajan is just as good as the '63 set. It has significantly better sound.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Just gave away the NAXOs set of Beethoven's nine symphonies (Edlinger and Halasz conducting) to my family's hairdresser. She was ecstatic and could hardly wait to start playing it. Particularly nice for a gift since it has portraits on the discs:


----------



## DavidA

Mahlerian said:


> You're probably right, but then he probably would have written in a different way to suit the new instruments and exploit their capabilities.


Yes probably! But Beethoven had vision. His music reaches beyond the possibilities of the instruments he had available to him then. I mean, does the Hammerklavier sound better on a piano of Beethoven's time or a Steinway? I'd say the Steinway every time. How much better, then, does the music sound with the instruments that can do it justice?


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Mahlerian said:


> You're probably right, but then he probably would have written in a different way to suit the new instruments and exploit their capabilities.


Yes, Beethoven's orchestration was limited by what was possible at the time. If he had the Berlin Phil or Vienna Phil today I wouldn't be surprised if he wrote things on a scale that Mahler would have written them.....and included electronics in the mix!


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

DavidA said:


> Yes probably! But Beethoven had vision. His music reaches beyond the possibilities of the instruments he had available to him then. I mean, does the Hammerklavier sound better on a piano of Beethoven's time or a Steinway? I'd say the Steinway every time. How much better, then, does the music sound with the instruments that can do it justice?


No, his music could be played on the instruments he had available to him. They can also be played on the instuments we have now. If Beethoven had a modern Steinway he would be so pleased that he would probably use the whole range and compose with the intention to use it's idiomatic timbral range and technical capabilities to the fullest. I know that Beethoven _was_ on about development of the piano, especially with regards to how loud it can play!


----------



## dgee

With regard to historical instrument Beethoven, an important point in its favour for me is that using the instruments of Beethoven's time you get that feeling of greater excitement as the instruments can be played to their limit. Modern instrument Beethoven can sometimes sound too slick and sonorous for its own good - to my ears at least


----------



## SixFootScowl

How about Immerseel's cycle? Is that worth picking up? Will it be different from my Hanover Band cycle?


----------



## KenOC

I have Immerseel's cycle and do not find it exceptional (though it's good enough). For recent cycles, Chailly is probably better for my taste.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Florestan said:


> How about Immerseel's cycle? Is that worth picking up? Will it be different from my Hanover Band cycle?


It will be very different. I prefer it over the Hanover Band. One thing that Immersel's set brags about is the extraordinary authenticity on both a historical and geographical level as to the instruments and orchestra size being used! One let down is the March/scherzo section of the 4th movement of the 9th symphony which is played more in terms of Beethoven's nephew's erroneous marking of dotted crochet=84 rather than what Beethoven meant (which was one bar, or a dotted minim=84).


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

KenOC said:


> I have Immerseel's cycle and do not find it exceptional (though it's good enough). For recent cycles, Chailly is probably better for my taste.


Have you tried Leibowitz? Makes Chailly seem like bland cold porridge.


----------



## SixFootScowl

KenOC and I both have Leibowitz. There is a deal on Amazon for $1.09 to download 100 tracks, 34 of which are Leibowitz' cycle. It is titled "The Genius of Beethoven" on Amazon. KenOC posted it and I grabbed it. But I find the clips from Immerseel are different. The drums and horns are much more prominent and it seems very intense.


----------



## KenOC

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Have you tried Leibowitz? Makes Chailly seem like bland cold porridge.


I have Leibowitz (from the current $1.09 download) and love it. But I was speaking of recent cycles. Leibowitz doesn't count, unless the concept of time is geologic!

BTW if you need a Beethoven cycle, you MUST get this for a buck:

http://www.amazon.com/Genius-Beetho...418799652&sr=1-1&keywords=genius+of+beethoven

Read my review for a more complete list of the contents.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Florestan said:


> KenOC and I both have Leibowitz. There is a deal on Amazon for $1.09 to download 100 tracks, 34 of which are Leibowitz' cycle. It is titled "The Genius of Beethoven" on Amazon. KenOC posted it and I grabbed it. But I find the clips from Immerseel are different. The drums and horns are much more prominent and it seems very intense.


Immerseel has the most intense Beethoven 5th ever!

Btw, I highly recommend you get Jordi Savall's one and only Beethoven release: Symphony no. 3 and the 'Coriolan' overture. It's my personal favourite Beethoven 3, a shame Savall hasn't released an entire cycle! But I suppose it makes that single release all the more special.


----------



## DavidA

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Immerseel has the most intense Beethoven 5th ever!
> 
> Btw, I highly recommend you get Jordi Savall's one and only Beethoven release: Symphony no. 3 and the 'Coriolan' overture. It's my personal favourite Beethoven 3, a shame Savall hasn't released an entire cycle! But I suppose it makes that single release all the more special.


Haven't you heard Kleiber's fifth?


----------



## DavidA

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> No, his music could be played on the instruments he had available to him. They can also be played on the instuments we have now. If Beethoven had a modern Steinway he would be so pleased that he would probably use the whole range and compose with the intention to use it's idiomatic timbral range and technical capabilities to the fullest. I know that Beethoven _was_ on about development of the piano, especially with regards to how loud it can play!


Beethoven wrote beyond the range of the pianos available to him, especially after the onset of his deafness!


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

DavidA said:


> Haven't you heard Kleiber's fifth?


I remember the year I got it for Christmas along with the score. I listened to it and followed the score so much that people thought of me as obsessed! I took the recording and the score with me *everywhere!!!* I used to think Kleiber was the most intense......until Immerseel came onto the scene!


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

DavidA said:


> Beethoven wrote beyond the range of the pianos available to him, especially after the onset of his deafness!


Were they actually unplayable on those instruments? Where does it say this? I would be interested to know more considering I have always been into learning about instrument development.


----------



## KenOC

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Were they actually unplayable on those instruments? Where does it say this? I would be interested to know more considering I have always been into learning about instrument development.


Staier has a recent recording of the Diabelli Variations played on a fortepiano of Beethoven's time. It's quite good! Of course Beethoven would probably have reduced the instrument to matchsticks, as he did his own.


----------



## DavidA

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> I remember the year I got it for Christmas along with the score. I listened to it and followed the score so much that people thought of me as obsessed! I took the recording and the score with me *everywhere!!!* I used to think Kleiber was the most intense......until Immerseel came onto the scene!


Just what do you mean by intense though?


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

DavidA said:


> Just what do you mean by intense though?


Large dynamic variation used to great effect (including phrasing), very articulate and precise and clear playing in all the instuments, it's fast and has this brutal energy when required but also some of the most delicate, beautiful and sometimes mysterious (like at the end of the scherzo) sounds I haver ever heard in any Beethoven performance.


----------



## DavidA

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Large dynamic variation used to great effect (including phrasing), very articulate and precise and clear playing in all the instuments, it's fast and has this brutal energy when required but also some of the most delicate, beautiful and sometimes mysterious (like at the end of the scherzo) sounds I haver ever heard in any Beethoven performance.


I must confess I heard Immerseel and was put off by the music being rushed off its feet. Like Chailly! I invested in one disappointing set I don't want another.


----------



## Itullian

I'm glad i'm happy with my Beethoven sets. 
I tried a new one, Zinman, and gave it away.


----------



## DavidA

Itullian said:


> I'm glad i'm happy with my Beethoven sets.
> I tried a new one, Zinman, and gave it away.


I'll give Chailly another spin before I do the same


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

DavidA said:


> I must confess I heard Immerseel and was put off by the music being rushed off its feet. Like Chailly! I invested in one disappointing set I don't want another.


Well, _fast_ works only in certain instances in my view. Immerseel's recording works for me because the tempo reflects Beethoven's specifications which in turn were influenced by orchestras of his day, but it also has an amazing emotional scope from what it evokes in my own subjective take as a listener. Chailly doesn't work as well for me because I find the orchestra size and balance between the parts makes individual lines less clear, plus the tempo doesn't help when unbalanced orchestral colours and not so crystal clear lines are already an issue. As for expressiveness, Chailly's interpretation is somewhat lacking there in my opinion, and this is arguably much more important that simply _tempo_ in any work!


----------



## BartokPizz

Itullian said:


> I tried a new one, Zinman, and gave it away.


One man's meat is another man's poison. Zinman is possibly my most-listened-to Beethoven cycle.


----------



## DavidA

BartokPizz said:


> One man's meat is another man's poison. Zinman is possibly my most-listened-to Beethoven cycle.


Obviously there is not one way of doing this music. I think we are fortunate to have so many versions readily at hand to appreciate.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Well I could not pass it up for $12.57 USD. It is listed for C $10.25 plus shipping. There are two more available at that price.


----------



## hpowders

DavidA said:


> I must confess I heard Immerseel and was put off by the music being rushed off its feet. Like Chailly! I invested in one disappointing set I don't want another.


Thanks for the warning. Chailly, Beethoven and I, don't mix.

I too, found the Chailly set disappointing. Great playing by the Gewandhaus Orchestra, but little emotional involvement from the conductor.

I need a new set of the Beethoven symphonies like I need another gift of a blender for Christmas!


----------



## DavidA

hpowders said:


> Thanks for the warning. Chailly, Beethoven and I, don't mix.
> 
> I too, found the Chailly set disappointing. Great playing by the Gewandhaus Orchestra, but little emotional involvement from the conductor.
> 
> I need a new set of the Beethoven symphonies like I need another gift of a blender for Christmas!


the recording and playing are superb. It's just as if Chailly is trying to catch a train all the while. Everything seems too fast. All very well going on about the metronome marks but it's whether the music sounds right that counts!


----------



## Triplets

KenOC said:


> I have Leibowitz (from the current $1.09 download) and love it. But I was speaking of recent cycles. Leibowitz doesn't count, unless the concept of time is geologic!
> 
> BTW if you need a Beethoven cycle, you MUST get this for a buck:
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Genius-Beetho...418799652&sr=1-1&keywords=genius+of+beethoven
> 
> Read my review for a more complete list of the contents.


I downloaded the Krips cycle in mp3 to my phone for $5. Krips was the first 2 and 4 that I ever heard and I still enjoy those. The rest of the set is a little genial for a general recommendation it's nice to have available for listening when I travel.


----------



## SixFootScowl

hpowders said:


> I need a new set of the Beethoven symphonies like I need another gift of a blender for Christmas!


I recommend you do need another blender because blender sounds vary by the different brands and you would hate to settle on one brand of blender when there might be a better sounding one available.


----------



## realdealblues

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Well, _fast_ works only in certain instances in my view. Immerseel's recording works for me because the tempo reflects Beethoven's specifications which in turn were influenced by orchestras of his day, but it also has an amazing emotional scope from what it evokes in my own subjective take as a listener. Chailly doesn't work as well for me because I find the orchestra size and balance between the parts makes individual lines less clear, plus the tempo doesn't help when unbalanced orchestral colours and not so crystal clear lines are already an issue. As for expressiveness, Chailly's interpretation is somewhat lacking there in my opinion, and this is arguably much more important that simply _tempo_ in any work!


It's funny because I found the exact opposite. I find Immerseel completely lacking in any orchestral color or texture or emotional depth. Blurred lines and sour sounding brass. Chailly I can hear every note with full texture and depth and precision playing and sound.

Regardless of tempo Chailly works for me because he has a flow that works between each movement and unites the whole work. It's a lot like Glenn Gould. Glenn hoped people were tired of the accepted performances and were willing to look at something in a different light. He would "recompose" the work to find a natural flow that made the whole work sound natural and complete not only from movement to movement, but from beginning to end, and in a completely new way from the accepted standard. If you were to have never heard the work before and didn't know how it went in my mind it works and as Gould believed was only a testament to how strong works really were. That they could be played slower or faster or in a completely different style and they would still sound good.

Chailly's Beethoven is the same way to me. It sounds completely natural at the chosen tempo if you didn't know anything about the work before you heard it or didn't judge it only based on tempo. It flows completely naturally. By comparison Immerseel sounds choppy and completely unnatural to me.

I've never said Chailly's Beethoven is the best or even the way Beethoven should be played, but it is utterly fascinating how he pulled it off and in a sense recomposed it like Gould did to find a perfect flow using the metronome markings as a starting guide. It's something completely different and revolutionary from what's currently out there and that's the reason why I still own it.


----------



## SixFootScowl

All comments considered, I think Immerseel will work for me, and at the price I found it, I could not resist. Compared to Hanover Band, Immerseal is much more dynamic and has much greater clarity. I don't mind the Hanover set as I picked it up for $2.95 plus shipping and it includes overtures and the Missa Solemnis. I love good Beethoven cycles for low bucks! 

I don't have a Karajan cycle, but my son does via some budget release that we found at a garage sale, so he paid about $2.50 for the whole cycle.


----------



## fjf

I was listening to the 4th and 7th from the Chailli set yesterday and found them energetic and emotional. I was close to believe that Beethoven knew his tempi!.


----------



## SixFootScowl

fjf said:


> I was listening to the 4th and 7th from the Chailli set yesterday and found them energetic and emotional. I was close to believe that Beethoven knew his tempi!.


Try Benjamin Zander's 5th and 7th. Very energetic.


----------



## Guest

The cycle with Chailly is a big disappointment for me.In spite of metaculous playing i could not find any soul in it.What i here is theory in praxis and not a real distinctive vision.I will choose for the real grandeur with Klemperer and the polished Karajan 1963 wich i like very much.Simon Rattle with the Wiener Philharmoniker is also recommendable.


----------



## Itullian

Adrenaline is in, soul is out.


----------



## KenOC

Itullian said:


> Adrenaline is in, soul is out.


So long Bruno, we loved ya...


----------



## Itullian

KenOC said:


> So long Bruno, we loved ya...


Bruno lives forever, after the bombast subsides.


----------



## Lord Lance

Itullian said:


> Bruno lives forever, after the bombast subsides.


Lot of love for the fuzzy old loving man here at TC. Another reason to love the people of TC.


----------



## Lord Lance

realdealblues said:


> It's funny because I found the exact opposite. I find Immerseel completely lacking in any orchestral color or texture or emotional depth. Blurred lines and sour sounding brass. Chailly I can hear every note with full texture and depth and precision playing and sound.
> 
> Regardless of tempo Chailly works for me because he has a flow that works between each movement and unites the whole work. It's a lot like Glenn Gould. Glenn hoped people were tired of the accepted performances and were willing to look at something in a different light. He would "recompose" the work to find a natural flow that made the whole work sound natural and complete not only from movement to movement, but from beginning to end, and in a completely new way from the accepted standard. If you were to have never heard the work before and didn't know how it went in my mind it works and as Gould believed was only a testament to how strong works really were. That they could be played slower or faster or in a completely different style and they would still sound good.
> 
> Chailly's Beethoven is the same way to me. It sounds completely natural at the chosen tempo if you didn't know anything about the work before you heard it or didn't judge it only based on tempo. It flows completely naturally. By comparison Immerseel sounds choppy and completely unnatural to me.
> 
> I've never said Chailly's Beethoven is the best or even the way Beethoven should be played, but it is utterly fascinating how he pulled it off and in a sense recomposed it like Gould did to find a perfect flow using the metronome markings as a starting guide. It's something completely different and revolutionary from what's currently out there and that's the reason why I still own it.


Were you put off by Immerseel's over authenticity? The strings aren't exactly what one would hear in pretty much any other non-HIP Beethoven recording [Read: Ninty-nine percent]. Or his tempi? Because the movements feel - to me - pretty much flowing into one another as seamless as say Jochum's recording of Beethoven's Eight. Passion and energy is also in loads.


----------



## Andreas

Mahlerian said:


> You're probably right, but then he probably would have written in a different way to suit the new instruments and exploit their capabilities.


I doubt that, at least if what Wagner wrote in his essay on Beethoven's Ninth is true. Wagner claimed that Beethoven did not even keep up with the development of the orchestral instruments of his time (expansion of range etc.), as the score makes provisions for certain limitations that no longer existed.

Overall, I think Beethoven was a score composer, not a sound composer, so to speak. Had he been, he would have put much more effort in the colourization of his pieces. But he was Beethoven, not Berlioz.


----------



## KenOC

Beethoven wrote his symphonies for performance, not for the publishers (since publishers paid poorly for orchestral music, being expensive to engrave all those parts and then sell so few sets). And to ensure broad performance, he had to consider not the newest and most advanced instruments but rather the instruments that orchestras actually had in hand.

Anyway, I suspect that's part of the reason why his orchestral writing seems conservative.


----------



## Vaneyes

Deja vu.

http://www.talkclassical.com/21982-beethovens-orchestration-3.html


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

KenOC said:


> Beethoven wrote his symphonies for performance, not for the publishers (since publishers paid poorly for orchestral music, being expensive to engrave all those parts and then sell so few sets). And to ensure broad performance, he had to consider not the newest and most advanced instruments but rather the instruments that orchestras actually had in hand.
> 
> Anyway, I suspect that's part of the reason why his orchestral writing seems conservative.


Precisely! You can also tell from such innovative music as his early piano sonatas (say, the op. 10 set) which are miles ahead of his first two symphonies. Beethoven's symphonies earnt him more money, but it didn't matter so much to him if a sonata or two didn't get published. He could experiment more in some areas and genres really.


----------



## BartokPizz

Itullian said:


> Adrenaline is in, soul is out.





KenOC said:


> So long Bruno, we loved ya...


Eh, I don't accept that rejecting Bruno Walter's Beethoven is rejecting "soulfulness" as such (whatever that means--I assume we are talking about musical intelligence and emotional depth) in favor of superficial excitement. I can think of many conductors of Walter's generation and after who have left us more "soulful" Beethoven recordings than Bruno Walter.

Walter's Mahler is fine, as well it should be, and I own recordings by him of the 1st and 2nd, but I never reach for them anymore. Same for his Beethoven, also his Brahms and Mozart. All of the recordings I have of Walter are with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra (members of the LA Phil and the NY Phil) or the NY Phil and in none of these recordings does he sound like he has a really first-class orchestra at his disposal. Surely I am not alone in thinking this?

I know the NY Phil sounds pretty scrappy on Bernstein's first Mahler 5, too.

Too many good alternatives out there to content yourself with a second-rate orchestral playing, legendary conductor or no. My two cents.


----------



## BartokPizz

That said, Walter's Pastoral Symphony is pretty great.


----------



## hpowders

Yes, it is!!


----------



## DiesIraeCX

BartokPizz said:


> That said, Walter's Pastoral Symphony is pretty great.


Indeed, it is! It's my favorite Pastoral, I'm with you on the rest of Walter, though. Great conductor but I don't reach for any of his other interpretations as my first choice.

With regards to the slow/fast tempos. It's very much case-by-case for me. I like faster HIP-like tempos for Symphonies 1, 2, and 8 (Gardiner, Zinman, etc.). I enjoy moderate (Kleiber) to quick tempos (Gardiner, Zinman) for symphonies 3, 4, 5, 7. I like slower, more "majestic" tempos for 6 (Walter) and 9 (Karajan, Fricsay).


----------



## Itullian

Guess its just me and Bruno......and Klemperer and Bohm and Bernstein and etc.

And I love em.


----------



## DavidA

DiesIraeVIX said:


> Indeed, it is! It's my favorite Pastoral, I'm with you on the rest of Walter, though. Great conductor but I don't reach for any of his other interpretations as my first choice.
> 
> With regards to the slow/fast tempos. It's very much case-by-case for me. I like faster HIP-like tempos for Symphonies 1, 2, and 8 (Gardiner, Zinman, etc.). I enjoy moderate (Kleiber) to quick tempos (Gardiner, Zinman) for symphonies 3, 4, 5, 7. I like slower, more "majestic" tempos for 6 (Walter) and 9 (Karajan, Fricsay).


it is amazing that Kleiber is now said to have 'moderate' tempi in 5 & 7 when they are actually very fiery tempi. It's just he (like Karajan) doesn't rush the music off its feet! To say Karajan's tempi for 9 are 'majestic' in this fiery reading seems a bit odd.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

DavidA said:


> it is amazing that Kleiber is now said to have 'moderate' tempi in 5 & 7 when they are actually very fiery tempi. It's just he (like Karajan) doesn't rush the music off its feet! To say Karajan's tempi for 9 are 'majestic' in this fiery reading seems a bit odd.


Well, times have changed really. The old fast and fiery is the new moderate. Back in the day the now fast and fiery was the normal/expected tempo!


----------



## DavidA

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Well, times have changed really. The old fast and fiery is the new moderate. Back in the day the now fast and fiery was the normal/expected tempo!


The world is getting faster! One reason I doubt the metro me speeds is because I wonder whether orchestras could actually pkay the music at that tempo in Beethoven's day.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

DavidA said:


> The world is getting faster! One reason I doubt the metro me speeds is because I wonder whether orchestras could actually pkay the music at that tempo in Beethoven's day.


But evidence shows that they could. Specialists in this field have so often stated that techniques of the day and bow/instrument construction etc. influenced tempo choices. I'm not surprised that the tempo had become slower over time. In a video (or perhaps in some liner notes) about Rene Jacobs's recording of the Magic Flute it is made known that the tempo choices of HIP productions, even for works without metronome marks, can be sourced from written descriptions from performers themselves of the time. On the topic of tempos slowing down over the years, one instrumentalist who played in one of the very early productions of the Magic Flute stated that when he played in the pit a few decades on he noticed that in some of the numbers the tempos had slowed down to half speed.

So yeah, standard tempos have changed over time in interpretation of any work. Beethoven was meticulous about his tempo choices and these choices probably just reflect the era he lived in and the musicians he worked with.


----------



## hpowders

Whatever; but logical, intelligent listening should tell one when tempos are ridiculously fast.

That's why for me, I will always choose Wand over Chailly. The Wand simply moves me more at the slower tempos.


----------



## JACE

starthrower said:


> Here's my one and only Beethoven symphony set. It's on vinyl. I got it by mail order back in the olden days for 10 dollars. Nice LPs in good quality sleeves. I like Karl Bohm. A couple years later when CDs came out, I bought no. 7 by Ashkenazy. Never liked it. I got used to Bohm's leisurely tempos.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If I ever buy a complete set on CD, it'll probably be Bernstein on DG.


I have that exact same set. Love it!!!


----------



## DavidA

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> But evidence shows that they could. Specialists in this field have so often stated that techniques of the day and bow/instrument construction etc. influenced tempo choices. I'm not surprised that the tempo had become slower over time. In a video (or perhaps in some liner notes) about Rene Jacobs's recording of the Magic Flute it is made known that the tempo choices of HIP productions, even for works without metronome marks, can be sourced from written descriptions from performers themselves of the time. On the topic of tempos slowing down over the years, one instrumentalist who played in one of the very early productions of the Magic Flute stated that when he played in the pit a few decades on he noticed that in some of the numbers the tempos had slowed down to half speed.
> 
> So yeah, standard tempos have changed over time in interpretation of any work. Beethoven was meticulous about his tempo choices and these choices probably just reflect the era he lived in and the musicians he worked with.


But did they play it well? After all the premiere of the ninth symphony was done with largely amateurs. I think as well there is a limit to what scholars can find out. Even Gardiner has questioned a lot of the so-called 'authenticity' as he says it's pretty impossible to know just exactly how they played it. Yes, tempi have got slower but tempi only work when they fit the music. I have just listened again to Chailly's Beethoven 3 and find it exciting but ultimately relentless. Karajan (77) chooses an almost equally fast tempo for the first movement but somehow lets the music breathe!


----------



## JACE

Just thought I'd mention *Eugen Jochum*'s EMI LvB cycle, which is included in the _Icons_ box dedicated to Jochum.










I don't think anyone has mentioned it yet, and I've been listening to it often lately. I think it's fantastic.

Even though Jochum was a septuagenarian when he made these recordings, they don't sound mellow or stodgy at all. Tempo wise, I'd call them middle-of-the-road -- not at all "old-and-slow." But regardless of tempo, to my ears, these are vital recordings -- even if they're "beefier" than what you'd typically hear today.

Re: the Choral Symphony: Jochum's Ninth is GLORIOUSLY H-U-G-E and _INTENSE_. Great singing too, btw.

Want another opinion? Here you go.


----------



## DiesIraeCX

DavidA said:


> it is amazing that Kleiber is now said to have 'moderate' tempi in 5 & 7 when they are actually very fiery tempi. It's just he (like Karajan) doesn't rush the music off its feet! To say Karajan's tempi for 9 are 'majestic' in this fiery reading seems a bit odd.


Definitely. I agree, I think of Karajan and Kleiber as having pretty quick tempi, especially compared to late Klemperer/Bohm. However, as ComposerOfAvanteGarde said, the times have a' changed! Now Kleiber and Karajan's tempi are fairly moderate, but definitely not slow.

One quick thing, though. I've never really associated "fiery" with speed/tempi. For instance, Karajan 1963 is the absolute most fiery/intense Ninth I've ever heard, yet it isn't nearly as quick as Gardiner or Zinman. Same goes for Kleiber's 5th and 7th. They are fiery interpretations that are #1 in my book.



DavidA said:


> But did they play it well? After all the premiere of the ninth symphony was done with largely amateurs. I think as well there is a limit to what scholars can find out. Even Gardiner has questioned a lot of the so-called 'authenticity' as he says it's pretty impossible to know just exactly how they played it. Yes, tempi have got slower but tempi only work when they fit the music. *I have just listened again to Chailly's Beethoven 3 and find it exciting but ultimately relentless. Karajan (77) chooses an almost equally fast tempo for the first movement but somehow lets the music breathe!*


The tempi are much quicker actually on Chailly's recording. Are you perhaps looking at the respective lengths of their 1st Mvts? Karajan doesn't take the repeats on the 1st Mvt (which I agree with, actually). So Karajan's movement is shorter but only because of the lack of repeats which Chailly (and Gardiner and Zinman) observe.

Same thing for the 2nd Mvt of the 9th, "Scherzo. Molto Vivace". Fricsay's comes in at 10:31 with no repeats and Gardiner's comes in at 13:07 with both repeats. Yet Gardiner's is much much faster.


----------



## DavidA

DiesIraeVIX said:


> Definitely. I agree, I think of Karajan and Kleiber as having pretty quick tempi, especially compared to late Klemperer/Bohm. However, as ComposerOfAvanteGarde said, the times have a' changed! Now Kleiber and Karajan's tempi are fairly moderate, but definitely not slow.
> 
> One quick thing, though. I've never really associated "fiery" with speed/tempi. For instance, Karajan 1963 is the absolute most fiery/intense Ninth I've ever heard, yet it isn't nearly as quick as Gardiner or Zinman. Same goes for Kleiber's 5th and 7th. They are fiery interpretations that are #1 in my book.
> 
> The tempi are much quicker actually on Chailly's recording. Are you perhaps looking at the respective lengths of their 1st Mvts? Karajan doesn't take the repeats on the 1st Mvt (which I agree with, actually). So Karajan's movement is shorter but only because of the lack of repeats which Chailly (and Gardiner and Zinman) observe.
> 
> Same thing for the 2nd Mvt of the 9th, "Scherzo. Molto Vivace". Fricsay's comes in at 10:31 with no repeats and Gardiner's comes in at 13:07 with both repeats. Yet Gardiner's is much much faster.


The tempo HvK takes in his 77 Eroica first movement is fast. Nearly up to LvB's metronome speed. But quickness doesn't necessarily benefit the music. It I'd allegro con brio not presto


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

DavidA said:


> But did they play it well? After all the premiere of the ninth symphony was done with largely amateurs. I think as well there is a limit to what scholars can find out. Even Gardiner has questioned a lot of the so-called 'authenticity' as he says it's pretty impossible to know just exactly how they played it. Yes, tempi have got slower but tempi only work when they fit the music. I have just listened again to Chailly's Beethoven 3 and find it exciting but ultimately relentless. Karajan (77) chooses an almost equally fast tempo for the first movement but somehow lets the music breathe!


There certainly is a limit, but that's why these primary sources are invaluable documents. I suppose that hearing HIP beethoven the way it is today would be better for the music itself because at least we have professionals with decades of experience, not amateurs.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

hpowders said:


> Whatever; but logical, intelligent listening should tell one when tempos are ridiculously fast.
> 
> That's why for me, I will always choose Wand over Chailly. The Wand simply moves me more at the slower tempos.


Logical listening? That doesn't really make much sense. You're implying that "ridiculousness" of tempos in existing interpretations is objective which is certainly not the case.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Ultimately, regardless of tempos and the composer's intentions, if you like a particular cycle, that is the best thing. Walter is a bit slow for me, but I keep hearing that he has about the best ever 6th, so I plan to give his 6th another go.


----------



## hpowders

I'll stick with Gunther Wand. His performances sound logically right to me.

I am hpowders, logical listener.

It is my new signature. Displaying it proudly.

If it sounds logical, I listen; if it doesn't, I don't.


----------



## Itullian

hpowders said:


> I'll stick with Gunther Wand. His performances sound logically right to me.
> 
> I am hpowders, logical listener.
> 
> It is my new signature. Displaying it proudly.
> 
> If it sounds logical, I listen; if it doesn't, I don't.


Its a very good cycle.


----------



## hpowders

Itullian said:


> Its a very good cycle.


I've bought many since, and none have surpassed it. Imagine if he recorded it with the Vienna Philharmonic?


----------



## SixFootScowl

hpowders said:


> I've bought many since, and none have surpassed it [Gunther Wand's cycle].


Ah but George Szell is right up there with Gunther Wand. Both great cycles!


----------



## hpowders

Florestan said:


> Ah but George Szell is right up there with Gunther Wand. Both great cycles!


I haven't heard it. One more Beethoven cycle I don't need. I have so many.


----------



## SixFootScowl

hpowders said:


> I haven't heard it. One more Beethoven cycle I don't need. I have so many.


How many? The more you have, the more significant your ranking of Wand as #1 becomes.


----------



## Guest

There is always room for another Beethoven cycle. Now, Haydn - that might be trickier. But a Beethoven cycle is relatively cheap.

And Szell is great.


----------



## SixFootScowl

DrMike said:


> There is always room for another Beethoven cycle. Now, Haydn - that might be trickier. But a Beethoven cycle is relatively cheap.
> 
> And Szell is great.


Well I am up to 6 cycles now: Wand, Walter, Szell, Leibowitz, Hanover Band, and (in the mail) Immerseel.

Yeah, I would not want to try multiple cycles of Haydn or Mozart (actually I don't even listen to their symphonies). I have a cycle of Mendelssohn, but am not sure I would go for more cycles there either, though with Mendelssohn it is fairly controlled having only 5 symphonies unless you throw in the 13 string symphonies.


----------



## Itullian

I have at least 16.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Itullian said:


> I have at least 16.


My mistake about a year or two ago was collecting Ninths. Why buy a Ninth when the whole cycle is not that much more. Of course not all those Ninths are part of a whole cycle. But there is a substantial per disc price advantage to buying cycles in many cases. someday I would love to see your list of 16 cycles and which are your favorites.


----------



## Itullian

Florestan said:


> My mistake about a year or two ago was collecting Ninths. Why buy a Ninth when the whole cycle is not that much more. Of course not all those Ninths are part of a whole cycle. But there is a substantial per disc price advantage to buying cycles in many cases. someday I would love to see your list of 16 cycles and which are your favorites.


I'll try to list them later.


----------



## SixFootScowl

What about Fricsay? I know it's not a full cycle, but I see a Fricsay CD set with Beethoven symphonies 1, 3, 5, 7, 8 & 9 (too expensive), but I can get a different set with Fricsay and symphonies 3, 5, 7, and 8. Would this be a good one to add to my collection? Here are tracks for 7 and 8.


----------



## Itullian

I'd go with the 3,5,7,8 set.


----------



## Lord Lance

Common mistake:
Starting with old-style Beethoven cycles. 
Alternate between: 
I.Modern practice (a la Walter/Karajan's near-perfect '83 cycle/"Mr. Optimum" Gunter Wand)
II. HIP with Metronomone perfection. (a la Gardiner - note he isn't "to the note" per se like Zinman/Muti's absolute whitewash cycle.) Avoid Roger "speed=greatness" Norrington's two cycles.
III. HIP with flexible tempi [Immerseel*]
IV. Modern with metronome markings followed and/or moderate instrument reductions [Abbado*/Harnoncourt] 
V. Awful recordings [Solti's forced Fifth]

The constant rotations will allow you to have an unprejudiced view on the styles which us "better experienced" [read: obstinate] listeners can't. Start with HIP


----------



## SixFootScowl

Itullian said:


> I'd go with the 3,5,7,8 set.


You're not helping me control my spending habits! Of course it's not the new year yet. I still have 10 days to spend wildly. :lol:


----------



## starthrower

I just bought this one, so I now have one set on CD.


----------



## SixFootScowl

starthrower said:


> I just bought this one, so I now have one set on CD.


That is the same series as my Szell set. They are nicely packaged in a box, hinged at the left and with cardboard sleeves. Not booklets, but mine does give performance dates:


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

starthrower said:


> I just bought this one, so I now have one set on CD.


I prefer this set to his DG one. This has one of the best Eroicas I've heard.


----------



## starthrower

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> I prefer this set to his DG one. This has one of the best Eroicas I've heard.


Cool! I heard the 4th was great, too.


----------



## starthrower

Interesting clip here. Bernstein on Beethoven's faults, and the inevitability of each note.


----------



## hpowders

I only have 7 complete sets of the Beethoven Symphonies.

When the wife is away for Christmas (Gracías a Díos!!!!) I intend to play the entire Vánská set.

Haven't played any Beethoven in at least 6 months.

Pray for me.


----------



## Lord Lance

hpowders said:


> I only have 7 complete sets of the Beethoven Symphonies.
> 
> When the wife is away for Christmas (Gracías a Díos!!!!) I intend to play the entire Vánská set.
> 
> Haven't played any Beethoven in at least 6 months.
> 
> Pray for me.


Consider yourself lucky. The joy that will reach your soul after being away from SIX months is monumental. You will truly appreciate it. Repeated listening might diminish their joyvalue.


----------



## fjf

I am listening now to the 5th by Furtwangler, and it is...intense. I understand why people like it, even though it is an old mono recording. I may have to get more!


----------



## SixFootScowl

Give this 5th a try (parts 2,3,4, and 5 are in the column to the right on You Tube).


----------



## hpowders

I listened to Vänskä 1-4 but find the sound fatiguing. One of the poorest recordings I have ever heard. Sometimes, one can hardly hear the orchestra when they play softly.

In contrast after the Vänskä 4, I played the Chailly 4 and while I find Chailly's tempos uncomfortably fast, the sound is terrific.

I may have to stop listening to the Vänskä with conservative tempos and start back at No. 1 with Chailly with much faster tempos simply for the sound.


----------



## JACE

hpowders said:


> I listened to Vänskä 1-4 but find the sound fatiguing. One of the poorest recordings I have ever heard. Sometimes, one can hardly hear the orchestra when they play softly.
> 
> In contrast after the Vänskä 4, I played the Chailly 4 and while I find Chailly's tempos uncomfortably fast, the sound is terrific.
> 
> I may have to stop listening to the Vänskä with conservative tempos and start back at No. 1 with Chailly with much faster tempos simply for the sound.


hp, I'm sorry to hear of the poor sound on the Vänskä LvB set. It's surprising. Usually, BIS's sonics are top-notch.


----------



## hpowders

JACE said:


> hp, I'm sorry to hear of the poor sound on the Vänskä LvB set. It's surprising. Usually, BIS's sonics are top-notch.


The dynamics are ridiculous. Often, softer passages are almost inaudible, and the general sound is not pleasing. Chailly's set is engineered the way I like-in your face, bright, etc;


----------



## realdealblues

hpowders said:


> The dynamics are ridiculous. Often, softer passages are almost inaudible, and the general sound is not pleasing. Chailly's set is engineered the way I like-in your face, bright, etc;


Same issue with Vanska. I found it unlistenable due to the dynamics. I had to keep my finger on the volume button constantly. Crank it up to hear a part and then a second later have my ear drums about blown out. Turn it down and a second later the sound disappears so crank it back up. It was absolutely ridiculous...


----------



## KenOC

realdealblues said:


> Same issue with Vanska. I found it unlistenable due to the dynamics. I had to keep my finger on the volume button constantly. Crank it up to hear a part and then a second later have my ear drums about blown out. Turn it down and a second later the sound disappears so crank it back up. It was absolutely ridiculous...


Same issue with Vanska's Sibelius with the Lahti people. The choice of dynamic range is ridiculous. Too bad, because they seem to be fine performances.


----------



## SixFootScowl

KenOC said:


> Same issue with Vanska's Sibelius with the Lahti people. The choice of dynamic range is ridiculous. Too bad, because they seem to be fine performances.


I suppose you could fix this in a music editor such as Audacity--though we should not have to do this. I did reduce some of the choral parts in one of my operas so that I could hear the soloists in my ear bud without blasting my eardrum in the choral parts. It's a lot of work though, but so long as I was doing it, I converted the files to mono for better one bud listening.


----------



## hpowders

realdealblues said:


> *Same issue with Vanska. I found it unlistenable due to the dynamics.* I had to keep my finger on the volume button constantly. Crank it up to hear a part and then a second later have my ear drums about blown out. Turn it down and a second later the sound disappears so crank it back up. It was absolutely ridiculous...


Yes! Yes! What a shame, as I have no problems with the performances.

This leads me to ask, wasn't the conductor involved in playbacks? Couldn't he hear the dynamics problem and SAY SOMETHING?????


----------



## SixFootScowl

hpowders said:


> Yes! Yes! What a shame, as I have no problems with the performances.
> 
> This leads me to ask, wasn't the conductor involved in playbacks? Couldn't he hear the dynamics problem and SAY SOMETHING?????


Perhaps he is deaf?


----------



## DavidA

DiesIraeVIX said:


> Definitely. I agree, I think of Karajan and Kleiber as having pretty quick tempi, especially compared to late Klemperer/Bohm. However, as ComposerOfAvanteGarde said, the times have a' changed! Now Kleiber and Karajan's tempi are fairly moderate, but definitely not slow.
> 
> One quick thing, though. I've never really associated "fiery" with speed/tempi. For instance, Karajan 1963 is the absolute most fiery/intense Ninth I've ever heard, yet it isn't nearly as quick as Gardiner or Zinman. Same goes for Kleiber's 5th and 7th. They are fiery interpretations that are #1 in my book.
> 
> The tempi are much quicker actually on Chailly's recording. Are you perhaps looking at the respective lengths of their 1st Mvts? Karajan doesn't take the repeats on the 1st Mvt (which I agree with, actually). So Karajan's movement is shorter but only because of the lack of repeats which Chailly (and Gardiner and Zinman) observe.
> 
> Same thing for the 2nd Mvt of the 9th, "Scherzo. Molto Vivace". Fricsay's comes in at 10:31 with no repeats and Gardiner's comes in at 13:07 with both repeats. Yet Gardiner's is much much faster.


IKarajan 77 first movement is almost up to Berthoven's metronome mark


----------



## hpowders

Florestan said:


> Perhaps he is deaf?


Yeah that would explain it. He surely fooled the Minnesota Orchestra!


----------



## SixFootScowl

So, I have been listening to Fricsay's Beethoven symphonies 3, 5, 8, and 9. Wow! These are really good. What a shame he didn't live long enough to complete a whole cycle. I know he did symphonies 1 and 7 also. But I can't find 6 and surely he would have done 6, no? I am listening to You Tube rips for 3,5, and 8 but when my CD arrives it will be 3,5,7 and 8. I already have 9.

Oh, and the Immerseel cycle fell through for me. The seller sent a CD of noise by a guy named Kagel. Have to return it. Seller does not say if he even has an Immerseel to send me. I see if I search ebay on Kagel, some come up with the Immerseal CD cover. There is a mix up and I would hope someone fixes it. Advertizes a 3 CD Beethoven set that shows listing for 6 CDs and sends me a 1 desk set of the wrong sound (not music to me, that Kagel stuff).

Oh and what about Steinberg and the Philadelphia Orchestra? Some say it is a good cycle, but apparently not available on CD with any kind of decent sound quality.

EDIT: Oh sweet! My DG Fricsay Beethoven symphonies 3,5,7, and 8 double disc set arrived today. Almost ripped. You know what I will be listening to Christmas Eve!


----------



## Lord Lance

hpowders said:


> Yeah that would explain it. He surely fooled the Minnesota Orchestra!


Why all the hate for Ozawa?


----------



## Itullian

Betcha don't have this one. Sawallisch, Concertgebouw, very good set.


----------



## opus55

The three sets I have, in the order of my preference, are: 63 Karajan, Harnoncourt, Gardiner. The last time I listened to Gardiner 3rd, I was quite put off by fast tempo. I also like Fricsay 9th.


----------



## SixFootScowl

opus55 said:


> The three sets I have, in the order of my preference, are: 63 Karajan, Harnoncourt, Gardiner. The last time I listened to Gardiner 3rd, I was quite put off by fast tempo. I also like Fricsay 9th.


I am on a roll with Fricsay. Had his Ninth for a long time, just got 5 other of his Beethoven symphonies and can't stop listening to them. Also just ordered a 10 CD Fricsay set and dug up a Fricsay Fidelio excerpts CD that I got in a library sale in October. I am going to have a Fricsay party for the rest of the year!


----------



## Itullian

opus55 said:


> The three sets I have, in the order of my preference, are: 63 Karajan, Harnoncourt, Gardiner. The last time I listened to Gardiner 3rd, I was quite put off by fast tempo. I also like Fricsay 9th.


Man, I have like 18 sets. lol


----------



## opus55

Itullian said:


> Man, I have like 18 sets. lol


I hope I don't buy that many but I can certainly see the *need* for 3-5 more cycles. Under considerations - Cluytens, Karajan 70's, Zinman, Szell, Bohm.


----------



## Itullian

opus55 said:


> I hope I don't buy that many but I can certainly see the *need* for 3-5 more cycles. Under considerations - Cluytens, Karajan 70's, Zinman, Szell, Bohm.


It's over many years


----------



## JACE

opus55 said:


> I hope I don't buy that many but I can certainly see the *need* for 3-5 more cycles. Under considerations - Cluytens, Karajan 70's, Zinman, Szell, Bohm.


I only have TWO complete cycles: Karl Böhm's (w/ the Vienna PO, DG) and Eugen Jochum's (w/ the London SO, EMI).

I'd recommend them both without hesitation. But forced to pick one of them, I'd go with Jochum.

I also have Szell's LvB 3, 8, and 9. All of these are stellar -- particularly the 9th. I can only imagine that his complete traversal is just as excellent.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Another great conductor with no Beethoven symphony cycle, and hardly any of the Beethoven symphonies he did record even available on CD is Antal Dorati. Check out his 5th and 6th clips.


----------



## opus55

JACE said:


> I only have TWO complete cycles: Karl Böhm's (w/ the Vienna PO, DG) and Eugen Jochum's (w/ the London SO, EMI).
> 
> I'd recommend them both without hesitation. But forced to pick one of them, I'd go with Jochum.
> 
> I also have Szell's LvB 3, 8, and 9. All of these are stellar -- particularly the 9th. I can only imagine that his complete traversal is just as excellent.


That Jochum box of yours is really a great deal. Another very fine Beethoven cycle contained in a larger box set is Karajan/Philharmonia.


----------



## SixFootScowl

I gave away the Walter set last night to my son (TC member Rocco) who only had the 80s Karajan cycle. Now I have to get Leibowitz for him--since it is so cheap (99 cents digital) and it is a very good cycle too.


----------



## hpowders

I've heard the modern fast Beethoven performances as in Chailly/Gewandhaus, but to these ears the good old-fashioned Wand performances at slower, saner tempos sound perfect to these ears.

If I hear another Beethoven 9th symphony adagio played like an andante waltz one more time....!!!! Those modernists should listen to any of the Karajan performances. His adagios are always spot on, in my opinion.


----------



## SixFootScowl

realdealblues said:


> I have all three. I agree that the live version has a touch more excitement which is often a by product of being a live recording. It is definitely Szell's best. The Cleveland Orchestra sounds different than the Concertgebouw but Szell's vision of the 5th itself didn't change much. Philips had a little better sound as far as the recording itself goes.


The Concertgebouw Szell 5th does sound very good (on You Tube). But, what about the the Vienna Philharmonic Szell 5th live from the Salzburg Festival on Andante label?

And what is this? Here is Szell with Wiener Philharmoniker, Beethoven's 5th.


----------



## geralmar

Florestan said:


> Another great conductor with no Beethoven symphony cycle, and hardly any of the Beethoven symphonies he did record even available on CD is Antal Dorati. Check out his 5th and 6th clips.


Actually, Dorati did record a complete Beethoven symphony cycle with the Royal Philharmonic. The individual records were once available as Mercury Imports. Unfortunately, last I read, no one can find the master tapes.


----------



## SixFootScowl

geralmar said:


> Actually, Dorati did record a complete Beethoven symphony cycle with the Royal Philharmonic. The individual records were once available as Mercury Imports. Unfortunately, last I read, no one can find the master tapes.


A real shame. Can't they can find the records and at least make transcriptions.









Meanwhile, I am giving my Furtwangler set another listen:









Curious why only symphonies 3-7 and 9? Did not Furtwangler ever record 1, 2, and 8? 
Also, are these the best recordings or are there other better Furtwangler performances available on CD?


----------



## geralmar

I commented too soon. The Dorati set is now available from Amazon as a Japanese import.


----------



## SixFootScowl

geralmar said:


> I commented too soon. The Dorati set is now available from Amazon as a Japanese import.


Great, but maybe too pricey, and will have all the foreign language characters on track listings? Would you have a link?


----------



## geralmar

Florestan said:


> Great, but maybe too pricey, and will have all the foreign language characters on track listings? Would you have a link?


Sorry, I just have some cheap handheld device that won't let me provide links. Just go to amazon.com and type in "Dorati Beethoven" and it will pop up on the first page. The set is not that expensive for a Japanese production, and new copies are actually cheaper than used. There is enough English on the box pictured so you should get the information you need. It appears to be a DG release, so the quality should be high. Be forewarned, however; when the LPs were originally issued in the late '70s, reviews were distinctly tepid.

P.S. If you're "Next to Detroit," I'm just down I-94 in Belleville.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Ah, thanks. I got it to come up. Well 50 bucks is a bit steep for me. Will have to check out sound clips at least before leaping into that one. 

Amazon is very persnickety. Search all day long and then try something slightly different and up comes what you were looking for.


----------



## hpowders

Japanese imports take forever to arrive. I ordered Bach's WTC Book Two from Tokyo, Nov. 10th, 2014 and now its Jan. 2nd, 2015. Still waiting. Never again.


----------



## Mahlerian

hpowders said:


> Japanese imports take forever to arrive. I ordered Bach's WTC Book Two from Tokyo, Nov. 10th, 2014 and now its Jan. 2nd, 2015. Still waiting. Never again.


This has never once happened to me. From whom did you order?


----------



## hpowders

Mahlerian said:


> This has never once happened to me. From whom did you order?


Samurai-Media. According to Amazon, the final delivery date which is considered within normal range is January 13th, so I can't complain until then.


----------



## Lord Lance

hpowders said:


> Samurai-Media. According to Amazon, the final delivery date which is considered within normal range is January 13th, so I can't complain until then.


More importantly, did you contact the seller? Regular follow up? Harassed him into hurrying it up? I could understand why a westerner would shrug this idea off.


----------



## Triplets

hpowders said:


> Japanese imports take forever to arrive. I ordered Bach's WTC Book Two from Tokyo, Nov. 10th, 2014 and now its Jan. 2nd, 2015. Still waiting. Never again.


I order a few Blu Ray Audio discs from the Land Of The Rising Sun. The average deliver time was 4-6 weeks.


----------



## Triplets

geralmar said:


> Sorry, I just have some cheap handheld device that won't let me provide links. Just go to amazon.com and type in "Dorati Beethoven" and it will pop up on the first page. The set is not that expensive for a Japanese production, and new copies are actually cheaper than used. There is enough English on the box pictured so you should get the information you need. It appears to be a DG release, so the quality should be high. Be forewarned, however; when the LPs were originally issued in the late '70s, reviews were distinctly tepid.
> 
> P.S. If you're "Next to Detroit," I'm just down I-94 in Belleville.


I was in Graduate School at Wayne State when Dorati became the DSO Conductor in the early 80s. I lived on Campus and his tenure started with a Beethoven Festival during which they played all 9. Many of the rehearsals were open to the Public (they were trying to generate excitement for the new era) and I attended quite a few. It was a great time for me but to be honest the actual Concerts that resulted were somewhat underwhelming. Not actually bad, as the Music is indestructible, but perhaps not able to justify the hype. The tempos were somewhat staid and the rhythms lacked punch. 
I have a vague memory of hearing some of the the Dorati/RPO cycle that Florestan is craving at that time and being underwhelmed. otoh, I have some Dorati Beethoven recordings from the early 60s on Mercury that are anything but boring.
Dorati was a Great Conductor and a Great Teacher, but he did his best work earlier in his career.


----------



## hpowders

Ludwig van Beethoven said:


> More importantly, did you contact the seller? Regular follow up? Harassed him into hurrying it up? I could understand why a westerner would shrug this idea off.


I will do that, thanks! Amazon indicates "normal" delivery is until January 13th. The order was placed around November 10th!


----------



## hpowders

Triplets said:


> I order a few Blu Ray Audio discs from the Land Of The Rising Sun. The average deliver time was 4-6 weeks.


This is now 6 weeks. I specifically used this company because of the glowing reviews "faster than I expected!", etc;
All the sellers were Japanese. I will attempt to contact the seller.

Update: Email sent to seller.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Triplets said:


> I was in Graduate School at Wayne State when Dorati became the DSO Conductor in the early 80s. I lived on Campus and his tenure started with a Beethoven Festival during which they played all 9. Many of the rehearsals were open to the Public (they were trying to generate excitement for the new era) and I attended quite a few. It was a great time for me but to be honest the actual Concerts that resulted were somewhat underwhelming. Not actually bad, as the Music is indestructible, but perhaps not able to justify the hype. The tempos were somewhat staid and the rhythms lacked punch.
> I have a vague memory of hearing some of the the Dorati/RPO cycle that Florestan is craving at that time and being underwhelmed. otoh, I have some Dorati Beethoven recordings from the early 60s on Mercury that are anything but boring.
> Dorati was a Great Conductor and a Great Teacher, but he did his best work earlier in his career.


I recently found a review that said much the same thing:


> If there is one serious disappointment from this period, it has to be the 1975 RPO set of complete Beethoven Symphonies. It was generally dismissed at the time, criticised for lack of vigour (exceptional for this conductor!) and it is doubtful whether or not it will ever reappear, even on a budget label. Performances are surprisingly routine, perhaps due to lack of adequate rehearsal time. Pick of the set is probably the Fifth, which seemed to suit Dorati's temperament, while the Pastoral receives a dull reading every bit as unsympathetic as his earlier 1962 LSO recording. I know that there are some who regard Dorati as a fine Beethoven interpreter, pointing to his LSO recordings of the Fifth (1962) and Seventh (1963). On the evidence of his recorded legacy I remain unconvinced, citing the lacklustre RPO set and the somewhat unyielding Minneapolis mono versions of Symphonies 3, 4, 5 and 8. The Penguin Guide at the time used "brisk and efficient" to sum up the Fifth; I would concur.


----------



## Lord Lance

hpowders said:


> I will do that, thanks! Amazon indicates "normal" delivery is until January 13th. The order was placed around November 10th!


Congrats on 10,00 posts, Mr. HPowders. Love your Bernstein profile picture. Looks stunning in his youth.

Also, was your appreciation genuine or sarcasm? Why didn't you think of this after the first two weeks? Not to "recieve", but to "check" on how far your product had reached.

Here in India, our online equivalents of your Amazon and Walmart, Flipkart and Snapdeal offer a stage-after-stage update page for all order.

Example:
1. Placed order sucessfully.
2. Seller recieved request and has accepted.
3. Product dispatched from their warehouse.
4. En route to your city/state/district/country [not possible in my scenario being a national service]
5. Reached your city
6. Reached distribution centre
7. Dispatched from the distribution center/warehouse.
8. "You'll recieve your package before 19:00/21:00" message
9. Received
10. "You/Your mother/Your brother received the package. Thanks for ordering from Snapdeal/Flipkart." message

A very rough draft with more detail than the actual one.

Lastly, appreciate the fact the seller's going through export efforts. Money or not, it's still a massive headache.

/Ludwig van Beethoven


----------



## hpowders

Ludwig van Beethoven said:


> Congrats on 10,00 posts, Mr. HPowders. Love your Bernstein profile picture. Looks stunning in his youth.
> 
> Also, was your appreciation genuine or sarcasm? Why didn't you think of this after the first two weeks? Not to "recieve", but to "check" on how far your product had reached.
> 
> Here in India, our online equivalents of your Amazon and Walmart, Flipkart and Snapdeal offer a stage-after-stage update page for all order.
> 
> Example:
> 1. Placed order sucessfully.
> 2. Seller recieved request and has accepted.
> 3. Product dispatched from their warehouse.
> 4. En route to your city/state/district/country [not possible in my scenario being a national service]
> 5. Reached your city
> 6. Reached distribution centre
> 7. Dispatched from the distribution center/warehouse.
> 8. "You'll recieve your package before 19:00/21:00" message
> 9. Received
> 10. "You/Your mother/Your brother received the package. Thanks for ordering from Snapdeal/Flipkart." message
> 
> A very rough draft with more detail than the actual one.
> 
> Lastly, appreciate the fact the seller's going through export efforts. Money or not, it's still a massive headache.
> 
> /Ludwig van Beethoven


Well thank you very much for those kind words!

The framework for delivery from Japan to the US was listed as 4-8 weeks. I contacted the company and they blamed it on "customs".

Anyhow all's well that ends well! I received the WTC Book Two in today's post (6 weeks) and have already played it.
I sent an email to the seller that I received it.
I ordered it from Japan because they had a monopoly on the item on Amazon.com and I wanted it.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Going back to Fricsay Beethoven symphonies. I just received my 10-CD Fricsay set and it includes Beethoven symphonies 1, 7, and 8. I already have CDs of Fricsay Beethoven symponies 3, 5, 7, 8, and 9 with the Berlin Philharmonic. On this new set, symphony 1 is Berlin Philharmonic, but symphonies 7 and 8 are RIAS which Wikipedia says is the RIAS-Symphonie-Orchester (RIAS being an acronym for "Rundfunk im amerikanischen Sektor" / "Radio In the American Sector"). Not sure what difference it makes; maybe I will notice after listening a lot. But nice that I did not get duplicate performances.


----------



## hpowders

Ludwig van Beethoven said:


> Why all the hate for Ozawa?


Perhaps because he was a mediocre conductor, rarely producing inspired performances. Just a wild guess. No hate. Just dislike. So many other better conductors to choose from.


----------



## Lord Lance

hpowders said:


> Perhaps because he was a mediocre conductor, rarely producing inspired performances. Just a wild guess. No hate. Just dislike. So many other better conductors to choose from.


That's a sharp comment.

What of his Mahler cycle do think you PowerH?


----------



## jflatter

What do people think of Blomstedt's set with Dresden? Heard the 3rd symphony and was quite taken by it.


----------



## Queen of the Nerds

LSO conducted by Bernard Haitnik. It includes all 9 symphonies, the Concerto for Violin, Cello, and Orchestra; and the Leonore Overture No. 2. It is titled "Beethoven: Symphonies 1-9: Special Edition" (as opposed to the regular edition) and is $11.99 on iTunes.


----------



## SixFootScowl

jflatter said:


> What do people think of Blomstedt's set with Dresden? Heard the 3rd symphony and was quite taken by it.


I am not qualified to give an opinion on this, but I will anyway. My suspicion is that Blomstedt's cycle would be pretty good, that based on his Ninth that I have. It has 4.8 out of 5 star rating on Amazon based on 21 reviews. The price is right too.

I have two Blomstedt Ninths from two different performances. This is the one I like best:


----------



## jflatter

Is your one a live one with Reiner Goldberg as the tenor or is it Peter Schreier? I may investigate this set.


----------



## Lord Lance

jflatter said:


> Is your one a live one with Reiner Goldberg as the tenor or is it Peter Schreier? I may investigate this set.



*Peter Schreier.*


----------



## SixFootScowl

The one I posted with the flames on the cover is recorded 1980 ADD. Singers include Helena Doese, soprano; Marga Schimi, alto; Peter Schreier, tenor; and Theo Adam, bass. Rundfunkchoir Leipzig, Chor der Staatsoper Dresden. Staatskapelle Dresden. This is the one I prefer.

My other Blomstedt Ninth is on Lazerlight label and was recorded live in DDD. Wdith Wiens, soprano; Ute Walther, contralto; Reiner Goldbert, tenor; Karl-Heinz Stryczek, bass. Dresden State Opera Chorus, Dresden Symphony Chorus, Staatskapelle Dresden. I see a date on the CD of 1989.

Before you buy a cycle you may want to look at the reviews on Amazon, other reviews through Google search, read this whole thread, and/or look at three brief, useful comparative lists of Beethoven symphony cycles on Amazon. I believe Blomstedt is discussed on at least one of these lists:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/richpub/syltguides/fullview/R1TJMOK4UK4ZUW

http://www.amazon.com/gp/richpub/syltguides/fullview/EIU72VBEOE1

This last one put together by TC member KenOC:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/richpub/syltguides/fullview/R1L1EGKNY1ZC8X/ref=cm_srch_res_rpsy_alt_4

Or you can download the entire Rene Leibowitz cycle (a great one too) for $1.09 and get the complete Egmont, all 5 piano concertos, and other music at Amazon. Search digital music there for "The Genius Of Beethoven"


----------



## Templeton

In the UK, the Hans Schmidt-Isserstedt cycle, with the Vienna Philharmonic, is available for only £8.49 (download only) on the likes of Amazon and Google Play. Dame Joan Sutherland sings on the 9th.

The CD equivalent on Amazon USA, with additional piano and violin concertos, at over $600, gets universal rave reviews. Here's the link:

http://www.amazon.com/Symphonies-Co...420968858&sr=8-19&keywords=Schmidt-Isserstedt

I have downloaded my copy and it is sumptuous.


----------



## wolfango

For an integral with good sound quality I would choose Karajan Berlin 1963.


----------



## Lord Lance

wolfango said:


> For an integral with good sound quality I would choose Karajan Berlin 1963.


Actually for equality, his interpretations from 1977 is better. Especially for the chorale finale of the Ninth.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Been mulling things over for a while. I have Szell, Wand, Ferencsik, Hanover Band, and Leibowitz. I could easily have the Masur cycle since I have part of it already. I also am looking at Bernstein, but maybe Abbado would be the way to go unless it is too much like Leibowitz.

Nah, forget it. I just ordered Immerseel. Could not resist after finding it for only $12 USD new with free shipping. Meanwhile, I listened to Hanover, then Wand, and am not into Szell. I am liking Szell a lot, more than Wand in fact. Ferencsik and Leibowitz are next, but i don't think they will beat out Szell.


----------



## hpowders

Florestan said:


> Been mulling things over for a while. I have Szell, Wand, Ferencsik, Hanover Band, and Leibowitz. I could easily have the Masur cycle since I have part of it already. I also am looking at Bernstein, but maybe Abbado would be the way to go unless it is too much like Leibowitz.
> 
> Nah, forget it. I just ordered Immerseel. Could not resist after finding it for only $12 USD new with free shipping. Meanwhile, I listened to Hanover, then Wand, and am not into Szell. I am liking Szell a lot, more than Wand in fact. Ferencsik and Leibowitz are next, but i don't think they will beat out Szell.


Curious to hear what you think of the Immerseel in Beethoven. I have his complete Mozart Keyboard Concerto set and find it to be very fine, but Beethoven's a different animal.


----------



## SixFootScowl

hpowders said:


> Curious to hear what you think of the Immerseel in Beethoven. I have his complete Mozart Keyboard Concerto set and find it to be very fine, but Beethoven's a different animal.


I am confident Immerseel will beat the pants off of Hanover Band, just because Hanover had stupid miking (I understand it was a single mike in the middle which worked great for Johnny Winter recording Muddy Waters, but not for Beethoven). Once I get the set and listen through a couple times I'll get back to you. Many have said Beethoven symphonies just don't agree well with HIP. We'll see.


----------



## DiesIraeCX

Two posts above me, in the unlikely case that you decide to click "view post". 

When it comes to tempos, Immerseel does not take a one-size-fits-all approach like Chailly or Gardiner. Some tempos are as HIP-fast, others are quite standard (but never slow). For instance, the first movement of the Ninth is almost 15 and a half minutes, that's nearly as fast as Karajan! Yet the Adagio Cantabile third movement is under 13 minutes (a bit of a disappointment). In the Seventh, it's more or the less the same tempo as Kleiber's renowned recording, sometimes slower actually. The Fifth is quite brisk. The Eroica's first movement with repeats comes in at 17 minutes! Compare with Gardiner whose first movement is barely over 15 and half minutes. Immerseel is similar to Hogwood in this regard; it's HIP, but it may appeal to those who are averse to HIP. I like that Immerseel interprets them on a case-by-case basis, I think that's the correct way. Why would anyone want to indiscriminately follow Beethoven's (_sometimes _absurd) metronome markings as if they were the end-all be-all?

The actual sound is the best I've ever heard. Furthermore, you can hear all the distinct instruments like no other recording, it has unmatched clarity. You feel like you're actually hearing all the working and moving parts of a machine.


----------



## SixFootScowl

DiesIraeVIX said:


> The actual sound is the best I've ever heard. Furthermore, you can hear all the distinct instruments like no other recording, it has unmatched clarity. You feel like you're actually hearing all the working and moving parts of a machine.


I am greatly anticipating the Immerseel set. I hope it arrives soon, like today.


----------



## DiesIraeCX

Florestan said:


> I am greatly anticipating the Immerseel set. I hope it arrives soon, like today.


I hope you get it today, too! Mine just shipped today, should be about 3-5 more days for me. I patiently await its arrival.


----------



## SixFootScowl

DiesIraeCX said:


> I hope you get it today, too! Mine just shipped today, should be about 3-5 more days for me. I patiently await its arrival.


No it went bust. I received Kegal's Acoustica, the same garbage I received in December from a different (in seller name anyway) seller. Return processing. In frustration I nailed the Bernstein NYPO set I had been drooling over for weeks. Also nailed a Monteux part set of 1,3,6, and 8.

But now I am wondering how this cycle is. I have his Missa Solemnis and love it.


----------



## jim prideaux

right!

have now decided!

van Immerseel/Anima Eterna

Wand/NDR

Now I need to get the courage to part with the cash....in the meantime continue with Harnoncourt and Gardiner,and may return to the HvK 80's cycle (although I do believe it is with those recordings that my disaffection originated)

fundamatal problem-cannot stop listening to the 2nd and i think it is 'messing with my head'!


----------



## SixFootScowl

jim prideaux said:


> fundamatal problem-cannot stop listening to the 2nd and i think it is 'messing with my head'!


The cure for that is to do what I do, which is to listen to all nine symphonies one after the other. I have a hard time listening to just one, but have to imbibe an entire cycle at a time. Because of the time factor, this only works thanks to MP3 players and a ear bud.


----------



## SixFootScowl

I have been listening to this, which just came in today's mail. 
It is so good that Monteux just might end up as my #1 cycle.


----------



## merlinus

Have you tried Eugen Jochum, especially his last cycle for EMI with LSO?


----------



## hpowders

Florestan said:


> I am confident Immerseel will beat the pants off of Hanover Band, just because Hanover had stupid miking (I understand it was a single mike in the middle which worked great for Johnny Winter recording Muddy Waters, but not for Beethoven). Once I get the set and listen through a couple times I'll get back to you. Many have said Beethoven symphonies just don't agree well with HIP. We'll see.


Well, Chailly's cycle was supposedly influenced by HIP and I find it mostly too bloody fast.


----------



## SixFootScowl

merlinus said:


> Have you tried Eugen Jochum, especially his last cycle for EMI with LSO?


Have not tried it. What is needed is a GREAT and low priced cycle. Monteux would be close to $50 plus in three different sets to get a full cycle.


----------



## merlinus

hpowders said:


> Well, Chailly's cycle was supposedly influenced by HIP and I find it mostly too bloody fast.


Just like most of "modern" life, eh?


----------



## hpowders

merlinus said:


> Just like most of "modern" life, eh?


One should take time to smell the roses.


----------



## merlinus

Florestan said:


> Have not tried it. What is needed is a GREAT and low priced cycle. Monteux would be close to $50 plus in three different sets to get a full cycle.


EMI has issued a Jochum Icon box that includes full cycles of Beethoven, Bruckner (1-9) and Brahms symphonies, plus Bach Mass in B minor and Mozart Coronation Mass and Vespers, for less than $50 including shipping from a few reseller, and a tad more than that from amazon prime.


----------



## merlinus

hpowders said:


> One should take time to smell the roses.


But not the rot of historically uninspired performances that use speed (and hype) to make up for lack of depth and other deficiencies. Beethoven-lite for the modern age.


----------



## hpowders

merlinus said:


> But not the rot of historically uninspired performances that use speed (and hype) to make up for lack of depth and other deficiencies. Beethoven-lite for the modern age.


Exactly. Well-said! Sounds like Roger Norrington's resumé.


----------



## hapiper

Someone needs to enlighten me, what does HIP or Non-HIP mean??


----------



## DiesIraeCX

hapiper said:


> Someone needs to enlighten me, what does HIP or Non-HIP mean??


hapiper, HIP stands for "Historically Informed Performance". What this means is certain conductors/orchestra will try to model their performances on the standards, methods, and practices of the times in which they were composed, for maximum "authenticity" (a controversial word and idea, no doubt!). For instance, in Beethoven's case, a conductor would study the tempo markings of Beethoven and incorporate them into the performance. Therefore, the tempos will be more or less the way Beethoven envisioned them. Often HIP orchestras will used period instruments, which sound different than modern instruments. The size of the orchestra is also important, the orchestral forces grew larger throughout the 19th century, in HIP performances, the size of the orchestra may be reduced as they were in Mozart and Beethoven's time.

Jos van Immerseel is the conductor of the Anima Eterna orchestra (HIP). In the booklet for his Beethoven symphony cycle, he goes over certain points. This should give you an idea of what a HIP conductor studies and finds important:

Sources and Scores
Instruments and Playing Techniques
Pitch
Orchestral Forces
Acoustics in Beethoven's Time
Tempo
Slowing up at the Final Cadences
Dynamics

"His art is most effectively rendered in an interpretation in which respect and freedom go hand in hand. Respect entails conscientious execution of the written text, the use of the instruments prescribed by the composer, and implementation of the various elements which went without saying at the time - pitch, performance practice, internal orchestral balance, respect of tempo markings, and so on. The dimension of freedom lies in the right to be an individual of today with one's (invariably personal) culture and sensibility , to blend the available elements as one sees fit, and to communicate all of this to an audience. It is when respect and freedom engage in fruitful dialogue that Beethoven is most likely to appear in his full gravity, drama, wit and humour"

I can't help but agree with that.


----------



## hapiper

DiesIraeCX said:


> hapiper, HIP stands for "Historically Informed Performance". What this means is certain conductors/orchestra will try to model their performances on the standards, methods, and practices of the times in which they were composed, for maximum "authenticity" (a controversial word and idea, no doubt!). For instance, in Beethoven's case, a conductor would study the tempo markings of Beethoven and incorporate them into the performance. Therefore, the tempos will be more or less the way Beethoven envisioned them. Often HIP orchestras will used period instruments, which sound different than modern instruments. The size of the orchestra is also important, the orchestral forces grew larger throughout the 19th century, in HIP performances, the size of the orchestra may be reduced as they were in Mozart and Beethoven's time.
> 
> Jos van Immerseel is the conductor of the Anima Eterna orchestra (HIP). In the booklet for his Beethoven symphony cycle, he goes over certain points. This should give you an idea of what a HIP conductor studies and finds important:
> 
> Sources and Scores
> Instruments and Playing Techniques
> Pitch
> Orchestral Forces
> Acoustics in Beethoven's Time
> Tempo
> Slowing up at the Final Cadences
> Dynamics
> 
> "His art is most effectively rendered in an interpretation in which respect and freedom go hand in hand. Respect entails conscientious execution of the written text, the use of the instruments prescribed by the composer, and implementation of the various elements which went without saying at the time - pitch, performance practice, internal orchestral balance, respect of tempo markings, and so on. The dimension of freedom lies in the right to be an individual of today with one's (invariably personal) culture and sensibility , to blend the available elements as one sees fit, and to communicate all of this to an audience. It is when respect and freedom engage in fruitful dialogue that Beethoven is most likely to appear in his full gravity, drama, wit and humour"
> 
> I can't help but agree with that.


Thank you for that very informative answer. It sounds like a conductor would have to be willing to put forth an incredible amount of time and effort to produce a HIP recording but as you say. I have to think, if done well, the results would be incredible. I for one, have no idea what a symphony would have really sounded like in Beethoven's time, but I would like to.


----------



## merlinus

hapiper said:


> I for one, have no idea what a symphony would have really sounded like in Beethoven's time, but I would like to.


Only way to do that is to become a time traveler!  And the HIPsters would have to do the same. Everything else is conjecture, as are, for the most part, so called "history" books.

IIRC, LvB stated that he never played his own compositions the same way twice.


----------



## hpowders

hapiper said:


> Someone needs to enlighten me, what does HIP or Non-HIP mean??


HIP means Historically Informed Performance-playing Bach, Mozart, Haydn and Beethoven with actual instruments from that time or reconstructions. Bach on harpsichord instead of a Steinway piano, for example. Beethoven keyboard sonatas played on a restored Broadwood fortepiano or copy instead of on a Bechstein Grand Piano.


----------



## sdtom

I've always liked my Toscanini set but it is in mono. Plus I may have an advantage which is a real mono amplifier to be able to listen to 78's.


----------



## SixFootScowl

I started this thread last November with this set of cycles:

Bruno Walter
Gunter Wand
Rene Leibowitz (digital download)
Hanover Band (more than one conductor)
Naxos set conducted by Edlinger except 3 and 6 conducted by Halasz

Wand was specifically purchased to replace Walter and Leibowitz was purchased because it was a whole dollar for the download of 100 Beethoven tracks including all of Egmont and all 5 piano concertos among other works. Hanover was bought on a whim after it was praised on a Beethoven site and I found the set for $3. The Naxos was also onlyl $3. I have since given away Walter and the Naxos sets. Currently my cycles are:

Monteux (LSO, Berlin Phil., and a live performance of the Ninth in France as well as a LSO Ninth)
Bernstein
Szell
Wand
Leibowitz
Ferencsik
Hanover Band

Of these, Monteux hit me like hearing the symphonies anew. I have only just received the Bernstein set, but having listened to the first three movements of Symphony 1 from it, I anticipate that it will be right up there on my list with Moneux, perhaps just below it. After that is Szell. I have little use then for Wand, Leibowitz, Ferencsik, and Hanover, albeit good cycles they are. I will revisit them on occasion though just for a break from the others. Also I have a partial (6 symphonies) of Fricsay as he did not record all nine, and a partial (6 CD WWII set) of Furtwangler, which I did not appreciate until hearing Monteux, but when I went through Furtwangler I got halfway and the sound quality led me to quit.


----------



## jim prideaux

have ordered the Anima Eterna cycle-not because of any great 'ideological' stance regarding the virtues of HIP performances but because I frequently found myself listening to their recordings on YT and the clarity and momentum really appeals to me!

I will however get hold of the Wand NDR cycle in the near future.....


----------



## SixFootScowl

jim prideaux said:


> have ordered the Anima Eterna cycle-not because of any great 'ideological' stance regarding the virtues of HIP performances but because I frequently found myself listening to their recordings on YT and the clarity and momentum really appeals to me!
> 
> I will however get hold of the Wand NDR cycle in the near future.....


A shame you are so far away from me. I have the Wand cycle and am willing to part with it, not because I don't like it, but because I like Monteux, Szell, and Bernstein's cycles much more.


----------



## AnotherSpin

I can not stay away from mentioning Felix Weingartner. His set, published by EMI is nothing less than wonderful. The sound is much better than one would expect from such early recordings - full body and natural. The performances are astonishing - free flowing, organic and transparent, playful and otherworldly. Orchestra sounds as one-man instrument. Nothing close to gross, petrified or ego-maniacal post-war interpretations from famous names.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Monteux (LSO, Berlin Phil., and a live performance of the Ninth in France as well as a LSO Ninth)
Bernstein
Szell
Wand
Leibowitz
Ferencsik
Hanover Band

Besides the above cycles, in the last two weeks I have added,

Zinman
Toscanini 1949-53 recordings.


----------



## Pugg

Florestan said:


> Monteux (LSO, Berlin Phil., and a live performance of the Ninth in France as well as a LSO Ninth)
> Bernstein
> Szell
> Wand
> Leibowitz
> Ferencsik
> Hanover Band
> 
> Besides the above cycles, in the last two weeks I have added,
> 
> Zinman
> Toscanini 1949-53 recordings.


Sill no Bernard Haitink ?


----------



## SixFootScowl

Pugg said:


> Sill no Bernard Haitink ?


Price and current focus. Compounded by which of his cycles may be the best. Maybe someday.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Oh ha ha ha, this is pretty funny. Back about 5 months ago I grabbed the Klemperer Beethoven symphony cycle with piano concertos included. It was all of $3.75 on Ebay with $2.75 shipping. I didn't need it, didn't even know if I wanted it, but the price was right and it did include an extra favorite piece, the Choral Fantasy. At any rate, it arrived, I ripped it and misplaced the files until today. Just discovered it in a wrong folder on my computer. Guess I ought to give it a listen sometime. A quick look at the booklet indicates Klemperer conducts everything and Barenboim is on the piano.


----------



## KenOC

Florestan said:


> Price and current focus. Compounded by which of his cycles may be the best. Maybe someday.


I have been studiously neutral on Haitink's Beethoven for years. But his new cycle with the London Symphony Orchestra has made me a near-rabid enthusiast.


----------



## SixFootScowl

KenOC said:


> I have been studiously neutral on Haitink's Beethoven for years. But his new cycle with the London Symphony Orchestra has made me a near-rabid enthusiast.


LSO set is much more affordable than the older one.


----------



## Pugg

Florestan said:


> LSO set is much more affordable than the older one.


But not as good


----------



## SixFootScowl

Pugg said:


> But not as good


The Amazon editorial review seals it for me that LSO is the one for me:


> Haitink's integral set of Beethoven Symphonies with the London Symphony has none of the stodginess that sometimes afflicted his earlier recordings with the Concertgebouw. His restudy of the works, and the presence of concert audiences translate into faster tempos, sharper accents, wider dynamic range and an overall sense of energy that imbue these nine masterpieces.


----------



## DavidA

Florestan said:


> The Amazon editorial review seals it for me that LSO is the one for me:


Must confess I find Haitink's 'lean beef' Beethoven a bit undercooked.


----------



## realdealblues

Haitink's LSO 4th and 8th are excellent but the rest were merely ok in my book.


----------



## SixFootScowl

realdealblues said:


> Haitink's LSO 4th and 8th are excellent but the rest were merely ok in my book.


Chances are, having already acquired 10 full cycles, I won't be purchasing either set unless a really great deal comes up.


----------



## maudia

*Klemperer*



Florestan said:


> Chances are, having already acquired 10 full cycles, I won't be purchasing either set unless a really great deal comes up.


Have you already heard the Klemperer cycle? You have one of the best Eroica and ninth of all


----------



## DavidA

maudia said:


> Have you already heard the Klemperer cycle? You have one of the best Eroica and ninth of all


Klemperer's Eroica has one of the best Funeral Marches but his handling of the first movement is too broad for Allergro con brio. The ninth is an upward struggle towards Joy but gripping in its way.


----------



## SixFootScowl

maudia said:


> Have you already heard the Klemperer cycle? You have one of the best Eroica and ninth of all


So far of the Klemperer cycle I have only listened to the 6th.


----------



## Enthusiast

Reading the OP again I do feel that the list it presents is missing quite a lot. The key thing for me is not speed or types of instruments per se. A great Beethoven set needs to convince and maintain our interest by presenting a compelling account of a "Beethovenian sound world". It is the sound world that sustains and gives shape to great Beethoven performances. So can one be without Klemperer or Karajan or Gardiner or Harnoncourt or Toscanini or Furtwangler or even Bohm? And Cluytens' set has always been persuasive to me as well. 

I am not sure the sets I mention are all among my favourite sets but they all do more than present good performances of the music: they all present different but equally convincing visions of what Beethoven might have meant. I regret that I don't know the walter set and am insufficiently familiar with Szell's set to know whether I would include it in my list.


----------



## Pugg

Florestan said:


> The Amazon editorial review seals it for me that LSO is the one for me:


Why should a amateur reviewer on Amazon know it all?
I am not saying that my verdict stands as a house, to me however the set is outstanding, like I also like Bernstein and a few others.


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT

Enthusiast said:


> And Cluytens' set has always been persuasive to me as well.


Well said, and I totally agree. One of the best Beethoven symphony cycles out there.


----------



## steventharp

I'm glad that somebody finally mentioned the Cluytens set, one of my favorite "traditional" sets of the symphonies. I'm puzzled that no-one has mentioned Harnoncourt's set from the early 90s, which was truly ground breaking at the time and, I think, still stands up to many of the cycles discussed here. Any takers?


----------



## Johnnie Burgess

steventharp said:


> I'm glad that somebody finally mentioned the Cluytens set, one of my favorite "traditional" sets of the symphonies. I'm puzzled that no-one has mentioned Harnoncourt's set from the early 90s, which was truly ground breaking at the time and, I think, still stands up to many of the cycles discussed here. Any takers?


It was on page 17 of this thread.


----------



## steventharp

Sharp eyes! But one mention seems a little pitiful compared with tons of commentary on Gardiner and Chailly, both of which I find very ho-hum, however tremendously hyped by their record companies and certain critics.


----------



## Johnnie Burgess

steventharp said:


> Sharp eyes! But one mention seems a little pitiful compared with tons of commentary on Gardiner and Chailly, both of which I find very ho-hum, however tremendously hyped by their record companies and certain critics.


I am sure it is mentioned in this thread some more times. I know it is on other threads on Beethoven symphonies.


----------



## Pugg

steventharp said:


> Sharp eyes! But one mention seems a little pitiful compared with tons of commentary on Gardiner and Chailly, both of which I find very ho-hum, however tremendously hyped by their record companies and certain critics.


Even sharper analysing . :tiphat:


----------



## Merl

Cluytens is a set I haven't got round to yet but it's on the HD. Agree about Harnoncourt,it's a very solid set and was loved upon release. I also agree about a set being convincing regardless of tempo. Weller and Asahina (two sets I've played a lot recently) are two cycles that are convincing. Asahina's tempos are very unpredictable and he's often on the slower side but he has a way with the sound of the symphonies (the Japanese Karajan he's often referred to as) that I like, especially the quieter ones. Creates some lovely textures rather than just pure bombast or racing car tempos.


----------



## superhorn

Solti recorded two Beethoven cycles for Decca with the Chicago symphony . I've heard the first but only parts of the second. As far as I am concerned, the first can hold its own with any others I have heard . It's bold, vigorous and propulsive but never rushed ; neither old-fashioned nor HIP .


----------



## Presolis

Szell with the Cleveland has been my Favorite for decades


----------



## Merl

superhorn said:


> Solti recorded two Beethoven cycles for Decca with the Chicago symphony . I've heard the first but only parts of the second. As far as I am concerned, the first can hold its own with any others I have heard . It's bold, vigorous and propulsive but never rushed ; neither old-fashioned nor HIP .


Not heard this set in years - forgot all about it! I have the 3rd and an incendiary 9th from this set and they are very good indeed. In fact, if I recall, all the odd number symphonies were really good. Will have to grab the rest of that analogue set and hear it again. I've never heard the later digital set but it got a bit of a panning from the critics, who unanimously agreed that he shouldn't have bothered (see Barenboim and his 'Beethoven for no reason'). I'm off to investigate again. Thanks.


----------



## DavidA

steventharp said:


> Sharp eyes! But one mention seems a little pitiful compared with tons of commentary on Gardiner and *Chailly, *both of which I find very ho-hum, however tremendously hyped by their record companies and certain critics.


Frankly Chailly sounds a rushed affair, despite the brilliance of the playing and recording. His Pastoral is a gallop, not a stroll, through the country and the slow movement of the ninth is to me laughable. I was conned into buying it but don't listen to it at all these days. An example of how critics fall over themselves to embrace the latest fashion in conducting. Years ago it was Klemperer who was THE way to conduct Beethoven.


----------



## Johnnie Burgess

Found this one on sale:

Beethoven: The Nine Symphonies
Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra, Ludwig van Beethoven & André Cluytens

Mp3 $6.99


----------



## Judith

I may have mentioned this before but just bought the Simon Rattle one with the Berlin Philharmonic. Very powerful. I've yet to play the choral!!


----------



## Merl

Judith said:


> I may have mentioned this before but just bought the Simon Rattle one with the Berlin Philharmonic. Very powerful. I've yet to play the choral!!


It is very powerful but lithe. It reminds me of Barenboim's set but more supple and weightier. The 9th is very good, Judith, but no more (probably the 'worst' performance of a very strong set) but the Eroica is superb and very intense. One of the anomalies I found with the reviews of the Rattle set is that many critics seem to have already made their mind up about it before hearing it. I laughed at one newspaper's review that called it 'technically immaculate but confusing' and then went on to to his compare it to his previous cycle, saying it was an improvement. The same paper labelled his previous cycle 'excellent' upon release but now labelled this new one disappointing. Pratts! Suffice it to say that if you thought his previous set was very good then this is an improvement. It may not be MY number one set but you would have no complaints if it was the only set you owned. Incidentally the Guardian's review is the most negative of all the reviews of the cycle. 90% of other reviews class it as a very strong set and some put it at the top of the pile.


----------



## Manxfeeder

superhorn said:


> Solti recorded two Beethoven cycles for Decca with the Chicago symphony . I've heard the first but only parts of the second. As far as I am concerned, the first can hold its own with any others I have heard . It's bold, vigorous and propulsive but never rushed ; neither old-fashioned nor HIP .


I recently bought Solti's cycle and read this feeling a cold sweat coming on wondering if I have the wrong one. Fortunately, it's the one from the '70s.


----------

