# The Best ~ & Worst! ~ Sibelius conductors?



## laurie

I think that Jean Sibelius is one of those composers that it's _especially_ important that a conductor really "gets" his music .... who do you think interprets Sibelius the best?
And, maybe more importantly, who do you think misses the mark?


----------



## CnC Bartok

Best: Collins, Berglund, Beecham and Vanska.

Miss the mark. Bernstein (but not in Pohjolas Daughter) and the later Maazel.

Expect ample opportunities to slag off Jarvi, Davis and Karajan, and of course Rattle, something I won't get involved with!


----------



## Strange Magic

I'll confine myself to _En Saga_ and state that I find Vladimir Ashkenazy's tempo waaay tooo slow. As I posted once before, the sledge is mired in molasses, rather than moving resolutely through the snow-covered forest. My favorite and always-reliable Sibelius conductor was Ormandy though I'm generally easy to please.


----------



## Strange Magic

More names: Anthony Collins as per Robert Pickett above; Horst Stein; Malcolm Sargent.


----------



## DeepR

There are two Sibelius symphonies I've listened to by quite a few different conductors and, for what it's worth, here's my verdict:
Symphony No. 2: Vanska
Symphony No. 7: Segerstam


----------



## TxllxT

Karajan & Beecham + Berglund for the tone poems. Neeme Jarvi is not bad

Vanska and all the other Nordic conductors are either commercialised sweet sellers, lacking paganism, or they are having a non-responsive orchestra at their disposal.


----------



## mbhaub

Great music can take a lot of interpretive stances, so there's no correct way to play the music. For me, the most extraordinary, exciting version ever of the 2nd is Barbirolli that came from the Reader's Digest recordings but on cd came out on Chesky. Stunning performance - and completely contrary in many cases to what's in (and not in) the score. Wouldn't part with it ever. Even though the composer eschewed Romanticism, treating his later symphonies too clinically is also deadly. I do have my preferred sets: Blomstedt, Berglund, Kamu/Karajan, Ashkenazy, Jarvi and Maazel 1 and Lintu on DVD. Sets I didn't care for: Rattle, Abravanel, and maybe surprsingly Osmo Vanska. His first set is better than the remakes. He leaves me cold. There is another set that is essential for Sibelius lovers: on Warner, Historical Recordings. Really delivers a lot of insight into how Sibelius was interpreted early on and by conductors who actually knew him and discussed the music with him.


----------



## Heck148

best: Bernstein/NYPO- his complete NYPO symphony set is superb 
Toscanini/NBC - great Sibelius "sound"
Stokowski - fine conductor of Sibelius,
Barbirolli - really knew how to do it, try his Karelia, or Leminkainen's Return....really exciting.
also 
Maazel, his VPO set is very good overall, not as good ad Bernstein, but still quite good, excellent Tapiola, 
Blomstedt- have heard good Sibelius with him.
not good, forget it- von Karajan- that ultra-smooth, rounded off, excessive legato just doesn't cut it for the Finnish master


----------



## Becca

A few comments:

- Alexander Gibson - not often considered but quite exceptional - try the 3rd & 6th
- Herbert von Karajan - ONLY his 1950s Philharmonia recordings - 2nd & 5th are very good
- Osmo Vanska - Did what I feel to be the most awful Kullervo. I have no strong feelings about the others
- Simon Rattle - I don't know all his recordings but his 5th done with the Philharmonia when he was still in diapers is very good. His first BPO concert cycle is also good although I am not convinced by his playing the 6th and 7th as almost a larger symphony with only 1 minute between them.
- Thomas Beecham - an excellent 7th - I haven't heard more by him
- John Barbirolli - I concur with the comments about his 2nd with the RPO. I like parts of his Halle cycle and also some of the tone poems
- Mark Elder - Verdict open at this time but some nice tone poems
- Colin Davis - A very good Boston cycle.
- Paavo Berglund - Still the best Kullervo (Helsinki)


----------



## Heck148

Vanska's "Karelia" complete was a real disappointment...dull, flaccid, lifeless....not remotely in the same league as Barbirolli [suite], Gibson [overture], or Fennell [A La Marcia]....I don't understand all the hoopla about Vanska.


----------



## Bulldog

Vanska's marketing forces are probably exceptional, and reviews I've read of his first Sibelius cycle were impressive.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

My best choices: Collins/London Symphony, Vanska/Lahti Symphony and Saraste/Finnish Radio Symphony Orchestra

My least favorite choices, though no real worst: Davis with Boston and London Symphonies and Berglund/Bournemouth


----------



## Pugg

Bernstein/NYPO- Ashkenzy on Decca and Abravanel on the Musical Concepts label.
No Rattle .


----------



## Heck148

Bulldog said:


> Vanska's marketing forces are probably exceptional, and reviews I've read of his first Sibelius cycle were impressive.


I remain unconvinced...I'm not going to spend any $$ on Vanska , until I hear something [free] of significantly better quality. couldn't care less what critics say.


----------



## KenOC

Vanska does fine but is betrayed by insane recording engineers. The dynamic range is such that his cycle can only be listened to in settings that are impossible to achieve in real life.


----------



## tdc

I have the Blomstedt symphony cycle on Decca with the San Francisco Symphony, it also comes with _Tapiola_ and _Valse Triste_. The performances seem quite good, so I haven't felt the need to expand my collection in this area at the moment. I think Blomstedt 'gets it', it seems at least a couple others here respect his work in this area, and I haven't come across any negative comments about it.


----------



## CnC Bartok

Becca said:


> A few comments:
> 
> - Alexander Gibson - not often considered but quite exceptional - try the 3rd & 6th
> - Herbert von Karajan - ONLY his 1950s Philharmonia recordings - 2nd & 5th are very good
> - Osmo Vanska - Did what I feel to be the most awful Kullervo. I have no strong feelings about the others
> - Simon Rattle - I don't know all his recordings but his 5th done with the Philharmonia when he was still in diapers is very good. His first BPO concert cycle is also good although I am not convinced by his playing the 6th and 7th as almost a larger symphony with only 1 minute between them.
> - Thomas Beecham - an excellent 7th - I haven't heard more by him
> - John Barbirolli - I concur with the comments about his 2nd with the RPO. I like parts of his Halle cycle and also some of the tone poems
> - Mark Elder - Verdict open at this time but some nice tone poems
> - Colin Davis - A very good Boston cycle.
> - Paavo Berglund - Still the best Kullervo (Helsinki)


I agree with a lot of the above! Alexander Gibson's cycle on Chandos is very often unfairly overlooked, a real shame. You got two of the best individual performance there, but his 7th is very fine as well.
I think there'll be some unfairness directed towards Karajan on this thread. Indeed his EMI recordings are more "Sibelian" than the glossy DGG ones, but how many Germanic conductors or orchestras were doing Sibelius then? Much of his championing of the composer was overall a highly commendable effort on his part!
Do try Beecham's (albeit crackly!) 4th and especially 6th from the 1940's. Special!


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

I see individuals' choices for "best" "worst" and "in between" are all over the map. Anyone looking for advice on what to choose or what to avoid might want to listen for her/himself to as much as they feel they need to of various conductors' performances on You Tube. Aside from interpretations, beware of excessively bright or muddy sound quality.


----------



## Orfeo

*Best: *


Barbirolli and the Halle Orchestra.
Bernstein & the NYPO.
Vanska & the Lahti Symphony Orchestra.
*Good to very good:
*

Segerstam and the Helsinki PO (his National Danish Radio SO cycle under Chandos is not to be sneezed at).
Ashkenazy and the Philharmonia.
Rozhdestvensky and the USSR Ministry of Culture Symphony (I wish they had done Kullervo).
Sir Colin Davis with the Boston Symphony Orchestra or the London Symphony.
Maurice Abravanel & the Utah Symphony.
Simon Rattle and the City of Birmingham SO. It has much to commend for it and the quality of the playing is consistently strong.
*Promising:* 


Bernstein and the Vienna Philharmonic (DG). This set was on its way to becoming something really special, but the great maestro passed on before completing the journey. That said, there's a lot to savor in his renditions of Symphonies I, II, V, & VII and with a world class orchestra by his side.
Neemi Jarvi and the Gothenburg SO: The first cycle (BIS) is good, but his second one (DG) is open to debate. It's worth another look in my opinion.


----------



## laurie

Any opinions of Sanderling w/the Berlin Symphony?


----------



## Quartetfore

I don`t care for the Vanska 2nd at all, there is no flow to the music, and the last movement seems to be the slowest that I ever heard. On the other hand his recording of the 5th seems to me one of the best. I have heard the Symphonies several times in concert, and my favorites were Collin Davis and the Boston Symphony in the 1st., and Eugene Ormandy and the Philadelphia Orch. in the 2nd. I did hear George Szell and the Cleveland Orch. conduct the 2nd., and thought it was one of the dullest that I ever heard. 
Ormandy to my mind was a very underrated conducter


----------



## Strange Magic

Quartetfore said:


> Ormandy to my mind was a very underrated conducter


I very much agree. Not only did he do the symphonies well, but also the tone poems.


----------



## david johnson

' Any opinions of Sanderling w/the Berlin Symphony? '

it's fine. was cheap, too


----------



## DeepR

If anyone believes there is a better and better sounding 7th than this one by Segerstam, I'd sure like to hear it.




It takes a little getting used to, but I for one can't go back to the others I've heard.
I have the Vanska set, which is my introduction to Sibelius. I was completely enthralled by the 7th for months and I didnt like any other recording I tried. It takes a very special recording to break that "first recording syndrome" and Segerstam did it.


----------



## chill782002

Robert Kajanus was the finest conductor of Sibelius in my opinion. He was a close friend of Sibelius and championed his music from very early on. Sibelius himself said that Kajanus was the best interpreter of his music and insisted that he conduct on the HMV recordings made in the early 1930s and sponsored by the Finnish government.

Unfortunately, however, Kajanus died before the project was complete and only recorded the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 5th symphonies, "Tapiola", "Pohjola's Daughter", parts of "Belshazzar's Feast" and the "Karelia Suite" and the "Finnish Jaeger March". Nonetheless, his interpretations of those works are considered by some to be definitive. "Tapiola" is one of my favourite works by anyone, I probably have almost 20 different recordings of it and Kajanus' 1932 recording with the London Symphony Orchestra is still my favourite. Obviously, the sound of all these recordings is of its time but Warner has done a great remastering job on its Sibelius "Historical Recordings and Rarities 1928-1945" box set. That said, I have the Kajanus recordings in transfers from the original early 30s HMV 78s which I think sound even better but the background vinyl noise on those might put some people off.


----------



## Josquin13

For me, Paavo Berglund was the "best" Sibelius conductor of the analogue & digital eras, while Robert Kajanus, who worked closely with the composer, was the finest historical Sibelius conductor (despite the poor mono sound of his recordings). Along with Kajanus's recordings, I've never heard a better Sibelius 5th or 7th than Berglund's final live accounts with the London Philharmonic (on hybrid SACD). Those recordings serve as a testament to a lifetime spent studying, thinking about, and conducting this music.

I should point out that Berglund was responsible for the revised, corrected Hansen edition of the 5th, 6th, & 7th Symphonies in the 1980s, having discovered Sibelius's own hand corrected conducting scores (of the original Hanson edition) in the late 1960s, which surprisingly were still in the possession of the Helsinki Philharmonic. Which means that until the revised Hanson edition came out sometime in the mid-1980s, Berglund was the only conductor that had incorporated these corrections into his live & recorded performances (for both his Bournemouth & Helsinki cycles). (Edit: In the Finnish Quarterly article linked below, Sir Simon Rattle claims that Berglund showed him many corrections to the scores in 1980, so it's entirely possible that these changes are evident in Rattle's 1st Birmingham cycle--that is, prior to the 2nd Hansen edition.) Berglund's deep understanding of the scores shows in how insightfully he phrases, and in how skillfully he builds to the dramatic climaxes. In this respect, no other conductor compares to him in the 7th, not even Beecham, IMO. Indeed, Berglund makes all other conductors of the 7th, even some very good ones, look like they haven't studied the score deeply enough. I should also mention that it is sometimes said Berglund's live Sibelius was better than his studio recordings, and I think there's a lot of truth to this view (despite Berglund's most exceptional studio recordings). His final LPO recordings of the 5th & 7th, for instance, fully attest to this:

https://www.amazon.com/Sibelius-Sym...pID=51JXKuXnPcL&preST=_SX300_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

https://www.amazon.com/Sibelius-Sym...1230795&sr=1-1&keywords=berglund+Sibelius+5+6

Yet, I've never heard a more poignant, mysterious Swan of Tuonela than Berglund's studio account with the Philharmonia Orchestra:

https://www.amazon.com/Sibelius-Fin...&sr=1-3&keywords=sibelius+berglund+tone+poems

Nor are there many Sibelius 2nds that I'd put in the same league with Berglund's powerful EMI recording with the Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra--an orchestra that Sibelius had conducted, by the way (see Finnish article below):

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00B5186OK/ref=dm_ws_sp_ps_dp

In addition, I admire the pioneering Sibelius recordings of conductors Sir John Barbirolli, Hans Rosbaud, Sir Thomas Beecham, Sixten Ehrling in his classic recording of the Violin Concerto with David Oistrakh, some of Eugene Ormandy--such as his Pohjola's Daughter, and the pioneering Dane Thomas Jensen--all worth exploring. (Though I've yet to get to Jussi Jalas--the composer's son-in-law, Anthony Collins, or Bernstein on Sony.)

In more recent decades, I've enjoyed hearing the current generation of Finnish conductors--most notably Jukka-Pekka Saraste, Okko Kamu (who I can find inconsistent, but whose recent 4th on BIS is remarkable), Leif Segerstam, who's not always as Finnish sounding as the others (& can slow down too much for me in the symphonies, at times), but who's wonderful in the tone poems, Tempest Suites, and incidental works (such as in his recent Naxos series), and Sakari Oramo too. As for Osmo Vanska, I find him most valuable in the more rarely recorded Sibelius works, such as his recordings of the alternative versions of the Violin Concerto (with Leonidas Kavakos) and the 5th Symphony, along with "The Wood Nymph", etc. On the other hand, I wasn't overly impressed by John Storgård's recent cycle on Chandos (though I've liked him elsewhere), or the single BIS recording that I heard from Hannu Lintu (of tone poems). (I've yet to hear Pietari Inkinen's live Japanese cycle, or anything from Petri Sakari's Naxos series, but would like to.) While among non-Finnish conductors, I've liked some of the Chandos recordings of the late Sir Alexander Gibson (such as his useful, good set of tone poems).

Who are the "worst" Sibelius conductors? Well, I don't care for what Paavo Berglund described as "mushy" Sibelius recordings (see the article linked below)--those conductors that aren't sensitive to how intricately detailed & complex--almost Baroque-like!--these scores are. Berglund said he'd had enough of the conductors that didn't know how to conduct the whole score in Sibelius. & I totally agree. I too prefer the harder, more vital, detail oriented Finnish approach, as exemplified by the textural clarity achieved by Berglund & Jorma Panula (who taught many of today's Finnish conductors). In Berglund's case, this approach can be best characterized by his insistence on using less vibrato in the strings & beautifully translucent horns (which are especially effective and inimitable in his Swan of Tuonela with the Philharmonia).

According to the article in the Finnish Music Quarterly linked below, Sir Colin Davis, Herbert von Karajan, and Sir Simon Rattle represent the "anti-thesis" of the Finnish approach, and frankly, I don't much care for their Sibelius: especially Davis's rather "impressionist" approach, which can at times be overly slow and dull (as with his boring LSO 2nd). While Neemi Jaarvi is at the opposite end of the spectrum from Davis, with his insistence on consistently taking brisk tempi. Whatever the merits of these conductors in Sibelius, none of them phrase with the same depth of understanding that Berglund does, IMO, and it shows in a side by side comparison.

As for Vladimir Ashkenazy, I've liked some of his Philharmonia Sibelius, such as his "Lunnotar" with soprano Elisabeth Söderström, but tend to find it too much in the Tchaikovsky vein. Sibelius isn't Tchaikovsky and his music shouldn't sound Russian. As for Ashkenazy's recent cycle on Exton, it has incredible audiophile sound (as usual with Exton), but I didn't care for the one disc I heard & wished I hadn't bought it. Yet, one of the most memorable Sibelius recordings I've heard from Ashkenazy was his stunning "Tapiola" with the Swedish R.S.O., which was used to great effect in Christopher Nuppen's documentary on Sibelius (you can hear the ice cracking!)--here's a clip from the film:






I also thoroughly enjoyed the following short HD documentary film of Ashkenazy's 2015 visit to Finland & Sibelius's home, "Ainola", which I would highly recommend to Sibelius lovers:






Finally, as promised, here's a link to an informative, interesting article on Sibelius conductors from the Finnish Music Quarterly, which covers the subject in excellent depth:

https://fmq.fi/articles/sibelius-the-view-from-the-podium


----------



## CnC Bartok

An interesting, albeit brief, post, Josquin13!
It's a shame that we can't resurrect the many valuable posts on the old Sibelius Appreciation thread over on the other place, a thread which never seemed to die and kept coming back.
I am currently working my way through Berglund's final cycle with the CEO, not a definitive cycle, but it emphasizes your points on his clarity and phrasing. A complement to my other key sets, methinks.
And while I still agree wholeheartedly that Berglund is The Sibelius interpreter par excellence, I feel the other approaches have their value and their validity. I do admire Colin Davis, especially his earlier Boston set,and while I don't necessarily equate Ashkenazy with a Tchaikovskian approach, there is nothing wrong with some warmth in Sibelius! Storgards isn't impressive, alas, I got the set for the fragments of the Eighth, not true most illuminating experience.
In the end, I still seem to be going back again and again to Antony Collins.


----------



## Becca

Josquin13 said:


> Sir Simon Rattle claims that Berglund showed him many corrections to the scores in 1980, so it's entirely possible that these changes are evident in Rattle's 1st Birmingham cycle--that is, prior to the 2nd Hansen edition.) Berglund's deep understanding of the scores shows in how insightfully he phrases, and in how skillfully he builds to the dramatic climaxes.


Simon Rattle also relates how, whenever Berglund came to guest conduct in Birmingham, he would mark up Rattle's scores ... then tell him!

Somewhere in the depths of the TC archives is a post I did some time ago about Sibelius' papers & sketches which were donated to Helsinki University about 20 (?) years ago and which form the basis of the latest critical score editions. One interesting note is that there are sketches of more than one alternate ending to the 7th. I believe that Vanska did a supplementary disk to his Lahti set which included some of these alternatives.

Finally, here is a video in which Simon Rattle discusses the Sibelius symphonies with Vesa Sirén, the Finnish music journalist, in which there are references to Berglund.
https://www.digitalconcerthall.com/en/interview/20350-3
(You may need to create an account to view this but it is free.)


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Robert Pickett said:


> In the end, I still seem to be going back again and again to Antony Collins.


....and I do as well.


----------



## chill782002

Josquin13 said:


> For me, Paavo Berglund was the "best" Sibelius conductor of the analogue & digital eras, while Robert Kajanus, who worked closely with the composer, was the finest historical Sibelius conductor (despite the poor mono sound of his recordings).


Berglund is certainly in my top 3, an extraordinary conductor of Sibelius. He also has the advantage over Kajanus of having been able to record all the symphonies and tone poems.

However, as far as "Tapiola" is concerned, I love his 1982 recording with the Philharmonia Orchestra. He, like Kajanus in his 1932 recording, captures the dark, bleak, paganistic and ancient feel that I believe Sibelius intended. I've heard versions that almost turn into full romanticism and reject the modernist element in it, which I'm sure Sibelius was determined to incorporate. He was known to be enthusiastic about the music of Bartok and Shostakovich in his later years and "Tapiola" contains a few fleeting dissonances which some performances seek to downplay but which, in my view, add to the overall majesty of the music. Kajanus captures this and so does Berglund, Kajanus because he knew Sibelius personally (and well) and Berglund because of his deep interest in, and appreciation for, Sibelius' music and his research into the composer's original intentions. For what it's worth, Vassily Sinaisky's "Tapiola" with the Moscow Philharmonic from 1991 is also very worthy of note as are his recordings of the other tone poems.


----------



## Heck148

A fine Finnish conductor who has not been mentioned, but deserves praise, IMO, is Essa-Pekka Salonen. He produced some fine Sibelius recordings with the LAPO - Kullervo - and Four Legends, En Saga....really fine performances...His En Saga is right up there with Toscanini's. and his Lemminkainen's Return is excellent also - in league with Barbirolli's wonderful account, and with Toscanini's.
I also remember a CSO broadcast he did of Sibelius Sym #5 - a terrific performance, that was very much in the style of Bernstein's non pareil NYPO version


----------



## LP collector

david johnson said:


> ' Any opinions of Sanderling w/the Berlin Symphony? '
> 
> it's fine. was cheap, too


The 4th has to be heard to be believed. Must be the darkest ever recorded which is possibly what Sibelius meant.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

Haydn67 said:


> I see individuals' choices for "best" "worst" and "in between" are all over the map. Anyone looking for advice on what to choose or what to avoid might want to listen for her/himself to as much as they feel they need to of various conductors' performances on You Tube. Aside from interpretations, beware of excessively bright or muddy sound quality.


Good idea. Sibelius seems to be a matter of personal taste more so than some others. Every one has a favorite conductor for every symphony. I would consider a complete set a waste of money for me. Sibelius takes a lot of effort for each Symphony to find that right one.


----------



## Guest

Oldhoosierdude said:


> Good idea. Sibelius seems to be a matter of personal taste more so than some others. Every one has a favorite conductor for every symphony. I would consider a complete set a waste of money for me. Sibelius takes a lot of effort for each Symphony to find that right one.


I've found the Segerstam/HPO pretty even, the Berglund/BSO slightly less so, but both worth the money.


----------



## Malx

Having just read through this thread from start to finish there is a lot I agree with and a lot that gives food for thought.
It's impossible to agree with all the thoughts of other posters but one thing I'm happy to add my endorsement to is the high quality of the Anthony Collins set.
I am now tempted to buy the historic performances box containing the recordings made by Kajanus - I really don't need any more Sibelius but its hard to resist!

One conductor I won't be pursuing is Bernstein at least not the VPO recordings - I've just sampled his 2nd Symphony from the DG twofer - Oh dear the second movement almost stopped moving forward at one point, not for me!


----------



## Mal

Let's make it harder - best & worst on one disk

I nominate:

Davis on LSO lIve (worst 5, best 6), and

Rattle (best 5, worst violin concerto)


----------



## Mal

tdc said:


> I have the Blomstedt symphony cycle on Decca with the San Francisco Symphony, it also comes with _Tapiola_ and _Valse Triste_. The performances seem quite good, so I haven't felt the need to expand my collection in this area at the moment. I think Blomstedt 'gets it', it seems at least a couple others here respect his work in this area, and I haven't come across any negative comments about it.


What about symphony 4? I thought Blomstedt sounded uninvolved in that one. The "third ear" reviewer agrees with me, so there's two negative comments, one by an expert (that's not me!)


----------



## Biffo

Coincidentally, I finished working my way through the Anthony Collins cycle yesterday and agree with all the praise. I got to know Symphony No 5 through the Collins recording on a LP.

I am not sure I could unreservedly recommend a complete cycle from any one conductor though Berglund/Bournemouth SO comes close. The single Vanska disc of Symphonies 6 & 7 with Tapiola is my favourite for all three works. For the symphonic poems I would have to go through them one by one and refresh my memory, something I don't have time for though Gibson is uniformly good.

I don't want to single anyone out as bad though I find Sakari Oramo mediocre; I know from other forums that others enjoy his cycle. Simon Rattle was better conducting No 6 live with the CBSO than in his recording. I didn't really gel to his fairly recent broadcast cycle with the Berlin Philharmonic or his idea of conducting 6 & 7 as one work.


----------



## hpowders

The best? Karajan. Ormandy. C. Davis.


----------



## Enthusiast

I do agree that some conductors don't get Sibelius. I think this is most obvious in recordings of the violin concerto, a work that seems to require a real sibelian in charge of the orchestra and cannot be successfully played as merely a display of virtuosity. I wish I could remember which accounts I have rejected for this reason but there are so many accounts that are good or better than the disappointments have been pushed out of my brain. 

When it comes to the symphonies and other orchestral masterpieces it seems to me that most who have bothered to record them have had something to say. And I do feel that great music is likely to yield magic in response to a wide variety of approaches and I certainly do not have single favourites of any of the major Sibelius works. So I do not really agree with some of the conductors or performances that some have held up here as bad Sibelius. In fact, for me, too many good accounts of Sibelius sound fairly similar to each other. So the Sibelius greats for me include Colin Davis (two sets that are quite different from each other and from what others have done with the music plus a live set that seems to add up a lifetime of experience); Vanska (two very different sets - both full of insight); Bernstein (the earlier NYPO set is excellent, the later set has indulgent moments but some pretty awesome music making as well); Karajan (his DG recordings have terrifying moments, but his other recordings are also very good); Rozhdestvensky; Barbirolli; Maazel (mostly his first set) and too many others. Some more historical recordings are also well worth hearing. Also very good - but overall I am not always convinced they tell me anything new - are Ashkenazy, Blomstedt, Berglund and Sanderling. 

I have been interested in the praise for the old Collins set as I have thought that it has probably been bettered and in better sound by now. I will have to seek out some examples from it.


----------



## hpowders

hpowders said:


> The best? Karajan. Ormandy. C. Davis.


I would also add Leonard Bernstein to the list of finest Sibelius conductors.


----------



## flamencosketches

To resurrect a dead thread, I just want to add that in this early stage of my Sibelius appreciation, I have been impressed with only a couple of conductors in this repertoire. These are namely Paavo Berglund, who is by far the most consistent Sibelian conductor I've heard, and Vladimir Ashkenazy, whose completely different, more romantic approach really works in the more dramatic symphonies like 2 and 5 (though I'm more skeptical about him in such works as 3, 4, 6 etc). I've been listening to the Petri Sakari/Iceland Symphony/Naxos recordings lately and I think these are really good too. As Josquin13 has posited earlier in this thread, there is a "Finnish school" of Sibelius interpretation characterized by lean, hard-hitting orchestral textures and I think Sakari may be part of this, along with a famous Sibelius conductor whom I do not like, Osmo Vänskä. Interestingly, I'm not sure that Berglund fits into this mold. His recordings are not quite as lean and incisive as what I'm hearing with the Sakari and Vänskä recordings, more robust. 

I am awaiting a 2CD from a very famous (and very controversial) Sibelius conductor, Herbert von Karajan... it is said that Sibelius himself enjoyed Karajan's recordings, and I feel I owe him a shot on those grounds. I also think his recording of the 4th symphony is great, oddly.


----------



## 1996D

Bernstein's 5th and 7th are better than Karajan's, he feels them much more.


----------



## Heck148

Bernstein, Toscanini and Stokowski, Barbirolli were all excellent Conductors of Sibelius....Ormandy could be very good also.
don't care for Karajan [completely wrong sound for this music.] or Vanska....for Vanska, I acquired his complete Karelia music....most disappointing, flaccid, wimpy...no where near Barbirolli or Gibson in this colorful early music of the great Finnish master.


----------



## mbhaub

I've heard and collected several dozen Sibelius sets over the years. Some I like more (Blomstedt, Bergland, Maazel, Bernstein, Jarvi) some less (Rattle, Vanska) but they're all at least ok - just different viewpoints and there's nothing wrong with that. But....there's a new kid on the block, and it's terrific! Brilliantly conducted, finely played, and with a recorded SACD sound that is about the best I've ever heard - amazing. And a French orchestra, even. If you like Sibelius you should hear this new release. Could now be my favorite cycle of all.


----------



## KenOC

This is a good set, esp. in 1-4.


----------



## Guest

mbhaub said:


> I've heard and collected several dozen Sibelius sets over the years. Some I like more (Blomstedt, Bergland, Maazel, Bernstein, Jarvi) some less (Rattle, Vanska) but they're all at least ok - just different viewpoints and there's nothing wrong with that. But....there's a new kid on the block, and it's terrific! Brilliantly conducted, finely played, and with a recorded SACD sound that is about the best I've ever heard - amazing. And a French orchestra, even. If you like Sibelius you should hear this new release. Could now be my favorite cycle of all.
> View attachment 125890


Thanks for this. I found this review online. Does any of it match your experience of this cycle?


----------



## david johnson

I'll speak up for Akeo Watanbe's old set


----------



## DavidA

I consider Karajan’s performances very good with tremendous tension and drive. Either his early ones with the Philarmonia or the later ones with the BPO. He did have one great advocate for his interpretations - the composer himself!


----------



## Enthusiast

I was trying to think of Sibelius sets that I _don't _like. The second set by Maazel is an obvious contender (I like the first - Vienna - set, especially its 4th symphony). And then there are two sets from Segerstam. I love his way with Sibelian sounds but feel that he sometimes seems to lose the thread, the musical argument.

But I like most sets that I have heard while these days I tend to prefer the ones that stand out as having something fresh or personal to say about the music. Many good sets take quite a similar approach and I have many of them. Meanwhile, there are some strikingly good (and some not so good) things in this set:


----------



## Heck148

DavidA said:


> I consider Karajan's performances very good with tremendous tension and drive. Either his early ones with the Philarmonia or the later ones with the BPO. He did have one great advocate for his interpretations - the composer himself!


Sibelius liked Ormandy's interpretations also..in fact composers are generally very pleased when prominent maestros of major ensembles perform their works....Shostakovich expressed approval of Bernstein, even when Lenny used some rather extreme tempos.....


----------



## Guest

Enthusiast said:


> I was trying to think of Sibelius sets that I _don't _like. *The second set by Maazel is an obvious contender* (I like the first - Vienna - set, especially its 4th symphony). And then there are two sets from Segerstam. I love his way with Sibelian sounds but feel that he sometimes seems to lose the thread, the musical argument.




The Maazel/Pittsbrurgh set is my favorite cycle!


----------



## Enthusiast

^ Really? That's a surprise as I thought nearly everyone disliked it! Is there something in particular that you like about it?


----------



## Guest

Enthusiast said:


> ^ Really? That's a surprise as I thought nearly everyone disliked it! Is there something in particular that you like about it?


The way they play music?

My experience is that most people are only vaguely aware that it exists. It is under the shadow of Maazel's "classic" Decca recordings.


----------



## Guest

To return to the original question, the top of my list is Maazel/Pittsburgh and Blomstedt/San Francisco. Probably my least favorite Sibelius Cycle is the Berglund/Helsinki, which I find to be a pale reflection of Berglund/Bournemouth, which is near the top of my list. Some of the Karajan recordings are very special, although he famously never recorded the third, leaving the cycle incomplete. I also like some of the old Jarvi/Gothengurg on BIS, and Berstein's crazy 2nd with the WPO.


----------



## flamencosketches

Baron Scarpia said:


> To return to the original question, the top of my list is Maazel/Pittsburgh and Blomstedt/San Francisco. Probably my least favorite Sibelius Cycle is the Berglund/Helsinki, which I find to be a pale reflection of Berglund/Bournemouth, which is near the top of my list. Some of the Karajan recordings are very special, although he famously never recorded the third, leaving the cycle incomplete. I also like some of the old Jarvi/Gothengurg on BIS, and Berstein's crazy 2nd with the WPO.


Interesting, I've heard so many people say that the Berglund/Helsinki was that conductor's greatest cycle. I always secretly doubted it. I think I even remember reading a quote from Berglund in which he said he was disappointed in the Helsinki recordings but that could easily be wrong on my part.

My least favorite Sibelian conductor, and this is going to be a controversial choice, is Osmo Vänskä, though I must admit that the Minnesota recordings are a huge improvement over the Lahti. For some reason those Lahti recordings just sound wrong to me, too thin, weirdly paced, and generally uninteresting. Nevertheless I will continue revisiting in the future as I know he is held in high esteem by so many and I suspect there is something there that I am missing. I haven't heard some of the more polarizing Sibelians such as Colin Davis or Lorin Maazel. I suspect Davis is not as bad as they say, I'll have to check out some of his LSO Live recordings one of these days. Maazel I have no interest in as a conductor in any repertoire.


----------



## Guest

Part of my problem with Berglund/Helsinki is a recording perspective that makes it sound distant and seems to sabotage the drama of the performances.

Vanski/Lahti is interesting, I like the way he handles the brass/winds. But the dynamics are too exaggerated in parts. I am glad to have heard it even if it is not a favorite.

What turned you off Maazel? He tends to be willful and idiosyncratic at times, but that makes for a performance that has something different to offer.


----------



## flamencosketches

I'm not sure. I heard a recording of his somewhere down the line that put me off, really boring. (Can't remember what it was.) And then recently I saw an interview with him in which he came off as a really boring guy. He was talking about Mahler and didn't seem to have much insight into the music. I'm sure I'll give him a fair re-evaluation at some point in the future, but as of now I don't think I have much time for him.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Favorites: Stokowski/National Philharmonic for the 1st...Ormandy/Philadelphia Orchestra for the 2nd 
(his version from the late 1950s)...Kletzki/Philharmonia Orchestra in the 2nd...Kamu for the composer's 2nd with Berlin Philharmonic and 3rd with the Helsinki Radio Symphony...Maazel/Vienna Philharmonic for the 1st, 4th, and 7th...Bernstein/New York Philharmonic and Barbirolli/Halle Orchestra in the 5th...Vanska/Lahti in the 6th and 7th.

My choice for the best interpreted complete set: *Anthony Collins and the London Symphony in fine monophonic sound. Other very good complete sets in stereo: Berglund/Chamber Orchestra of Europe and Saraste/Finnish Radio Symphony.


----------



## geralmar

I would be a little careful of forming a high opinion of a conductor's Sibelius recording simply because the composer endorsed it. Sibelius had a tendency to praise any conductor who recorded his works.


----------



## MatthewWeflen

I own The Karajan/Kamu set, which is excellent, exciting, mysterious; the Karajan EMI set, which is bombastic but also excellent; The Rattle/BPO set, which is a bit restrained but also has a nice air of mystery; and the Colin Davis/LSO set, which is quite well done.

So.... who are the bad ones? I haven't heard one yet.


----------



## starthrower

What's the opinion on Barbirolli/Halle?


----------



## flamencosketches

starthrower said:


> What's the opinion on Barbirolli/Halle?


I love what I heard of it. Which is not much.


----------



## DavidA

Of course Karajan didn't record the 3rd symphony. I don't know whether he even conducted it


----------



## joen_cph

I skipped Maazel/decca and Abravanel/Utah. I don't have a set that I consider definitive, including Vänskä/Lahti which doesn't catch me that much either. Also have Davis/philips, Karajan-Kamu/DG (overall recommended), Ashkenazy/decca, Bernstein/CBS and the underrated Rozhdestvensky, where the LPs have a more spacious sound than the CD transfers. Plus a good deal with Anthony Collins and many individual recordings.


----------



## Enthusiast

Baron Scarpia said:


> The way they play music?
> 
> My experience is that most people are only vaguely aware that it exists. It is under the shadow of Maazel's "classic" Decca recordings.


I guess many of us were expecting something exceptional after his Vienna set. I did try quite hard with his Pittsburgh set but that was a while ago. I think I can remember quite liking the violin concerto from the set but not the symphonies. I'll try again with a couple of them.


----------



## Enthusiast

It is interesting how so few members of this forum value what I hear as very special music making from Vanska - in both his Lahti and Minnesota incarnations. I remember the Lahti Sibelius recordings coming out to what was then fairly universal acclaim. This is the real Sibelius we were told - and there is a raw authenticity to them even if some were better than others - and they also included the to me unmissable recordings of the very earlier versions of the 5th symphony and violin concerto. And then came the Minnesota recordings and proof that with some conductors (Colin Davis was another) it is well worth recording the works again. His second take is so different. Not raw and wild but sophisticated and deeply planned. I didn't greatly like the first issue (2 & 5) but the other two issues brought a lot of new revelations. Personally, these days I'm only in the market for Sibelius recordings when they are revelatory.


----------



## CnC Bartok

DavidA said:


> Of course Karajan didn't record the 3rd symphony. I don't know whether he even conducted it


It's the only Sibelius symphony* he never touched. No recordings, no performances.

*OK, no Kullervo either, but you get my drift!


----------



## Heck148

geralmar said:


> I would be a little careful of forming a high opinion of a conductor's Sibelius recording simply because the composer endorsed it. Sibelius had a tendency to praise any conductor who recorded his works.


Exactly - composers tend to be very grateful to any Maestro of a major orchestra who performs their works...


----------



## Heck148

starthrower said:


> What's the opinion on Barbirolli/Halle?


I don't have any of the symphonies - but Barbirolli/Halle version of Karelia Suite and Leminkainen's Return are absolutely first rate - real rousing stuff....wonderful swagger and intensity.


----------



## Heck148

Enthusiast said:


> It is interesting how so few value what I hear as very special music making from Vanska - in both his Lahti and Minnesota incarnations.....This is the real Sibelius we were told - and there is a raw authenticity to them even if some were better than others -


Not to my ears - his complete Karelia music was a real let-down...flaccid, wimpy, lacking in any vigor or spirit....not even remotely close to the Suite excerpts by Barbirolli, Gibson and Fennell [a la Marcha] 
I've not tried any of the others, since this Karelia was such a misfire.


----------



## CnC Bartok

Heck148 said:


> Not to my ears - his complete Karelia music was a real let-down...flaccid, wimpy, lacking in any vigor or spirit....not even remotely close to the Suite excerpts by Barbirolli, Gibson and Fennell [a la Marcha]
> I've not tried any of the others, since this Karelia was such a misfire.


Very true re the Karelia music. That said, is this exclusively Vanska's fault? There was probably a very good reason why a brief - now famous - suite of three short movements was extracted from a sprawl of incidental music lasting nearly an hour.....

Vanska's other fuller sets of incidental music are great. I reckon King Christian is a real winner, both from the composer's and the conductor's point of view, and has become one of my favourite piece of Sibelius.

Try this one. The Karelia Ballade is sung here, btw:


----------



## Heck148

CnC Bartok said:


> Very true re the Karelia music. That said, is this exclusively Vanska's fault? There was probably a very good reason why a brief - now famous - suite of three short movements was extracted from a sprawl of incidental music lasting nearly an hour....


Barbirolli's recording is of the suite....Gibson recorded the overture...Vanska the entire Karelia music....on the overture, and 3 suite numbers, Gibson and Barbirolli are vastly superior to the comparable offerings by Vanska/Lahti....the pieces in common do not shed favorable light on Vanska....


----------



## CnC Bartok

The recording above is just the Suite. I was commenting on the whole incidental music CD as well. Most of the non-Suite music is bland in itself, one for the completists only, I reckon. I doubt anyone could transform it all into an undisputed masterpiece.....

In the music on the CD pictured above though, I feel Vanska does a damned good job!


----------



## Heck148

CnC Bartok said:


> The recording above is just the Suite. I was commenting on the whole incidental music CD as well. Most of the non-Suite music is bland in itself, one for the completists only, I reckon. I doubt anyone could transform it all into an undisputed masterpiece.....
> 
> In the music on the CD pictured above though, I feel Vanska does a damned good job!


Yes, I have the Vanska complete Karelia music...my point is that for the pieces that are included in the Suite, plus the overture, Barbirolli, Gibson and Fennell are far preferable to Vanska. for the non-Suite music, I have no other recordings with which to compare....


----------



## Guest

Enthusiast said:


> I guess many of us were expecting something exceptional after his Vienna set. I did try quite hard with his Pittsburgh set but that was a while ago. I think I can remember quite liking the violin concerto from the set but not the symphonies. I'll try again with a couple of them.


I recall that this set was the first that allowed me to grasp the 3rd symphony. Also, I recall being swept away by the performance of th 6th. Very fine audio and a sensuous approach, maybe not the icy austere Sibelius that we are supposed to expect.


----------



## Guest

Heck148 said:


> I don't have any of the symphonies - but Barbirolli/Halle version of Karelia Suite and Leminkainen's Return are absolutely first rate - real rousing stuff....wonderful swagger and intensity.


My experience is also that this is an utterly outstanding set of recordings. The symphony recordings did not blow me away, despite the fact that I am a great admirer of Barbirolli in general.


----------



## Heck148

Baron Scarpia said:


> My experience is also that this is an utterly outstanding set of recordings. The symphony recordings did not blow me away, despite the fact that I am a great admirer of Barbirolli in general.


Barbirolli's Sibelius #2 with RPO is very good....


----------



## joen_cph

I listened to Barbirolli a long time ago but was't enchanted. I didn't hear much architecture or narrative sequencing in them. Maybe I'd hear them differently today.


----------



## CnC Bartok

Barbirolli does seem to treat Sibelius in a warmer, more romantic, more turbulent manner than others. I think it makes his Symphony recordings with the Halle a bit hit and miss. He likes the big moments, and there's plenty of drama, but I thoroughly understand why Joen above is less than enamoured!

No.2 is a great recording, and I do like his 4th as well. But I am not a fan of his rather piecemeal No.3 and a frankly uninvolving 6th.

The shorter pieces in the EMI box are, as others have said, really great!


----------



## joen_cph

joen_cph said:


> I listened to Barbirolli a long time ago but was't enchanted. I didn't hear much architecture or narrative sequencing in them. Maybe I'd hear them differently today.


I forgot to mention that Barbirolli's 2nd with NYPO from June 1940 is one of his most interesting recordings, really worth a listen - a fine dose of creativity and well-done ideas there, and one of the historical Sibelius performances worth recommending, IMO.

(also has some good Mozart piano concertos with Fischer and Casadesus (Fischer is much more sparkling and good technically there, than he occasionally could be), an interesting Beethoven 4th Symphony, a classic Chopin's 1 St Concerto with Rubinstein, and a Grieg Concerto with Backhaus (less detached than Backhaus could be at times), a better Beethoven Violin Concerto with Kreisler than Kreisler's with Leo Blech as conductor, etc.)


----------



## jim prideaux

Sanderling.....becoming my 'go to' conductor for Brahms symphonies... and the Beethoven PC's.

Does anyone have any insights or observations regarding his Sibelius cycle with the Berlin S.O.?

Seriously tempted but difficult to justify another set of recordings.


----------



## lluissineu

I like Sanderling's BRAHMS cycle very much, but I must say that I enjoy more The Giulini's and Barbirolli's.
I love the Beethoven piano concs with Uchida, although I Have many recordings (last one I ordered is Paul Lewis, along with complete piano sonatas), that said I really thing Sanderling Sibelius cicle is one of The bests, but (only to give you a clue about my taste) I like Barbirolli's cycle, as well as Szell's 2nd, Berglund 3rd, Maazel 4th (VPO) and Rattle 5th.

Just in case you hesitate who don't you listen to them before buying The hole cycle


----------



## joen_cph

I sampled the Sanderling cycle a couple of years ago but it didn't appeal to me. As I remember it, it's not very 'weighty' Sibelius.


----------



## jim prideaux

Found the whole cycle really cheap second hand so I ordered it...….I sometimes prefer a less 'weighty' Sibelius...….one of the reasons why I do find myself listening to Berglund and the COE with frequency!


----------



## joen_cph

I think Berglund does indeed come to mind as 'related'.


----------



## Enthusiast

I don't object to the Sanderling set but it is one of those which told me little new about the music. If I had heard it first I might have liked it more.


----------



## hoodjem

Koussevitzky, then Barbirolli.


----------



## starthrower

deleeeeeeeeeted


----------



## starthrower

I just stumbled onto this set which includes the complete Collins cycle and quite a bit of other music.










https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/8075208--sibelius-great-performances

i can't deal with the antiquated sound on the Collins recordings but if anyone was looking for it it's right here.


----------



## CnC Bartok

^^^ Have you heard the Collins set? I know they're mono, but they are very good mono, and I have no problem with the sound quality (and I do in many other instances of old recordings)

Do give them a go. These are the best Sibelius out there!


----------



## starthrower

I just found the complete cycle on YT and it sounds okay. This guy removed all the noise. I previously listened to the samples of no.1 at Presto and it sounds like there's an old film projector running in the background. I'm afraid that's what it's going to sound like on the CDs. But it sounds clear and quiet on YouTube. Although the louder passages are still very crude. 




Presto samples:
https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/8075208--sibelius-great-performances


----------



## starthrower

CnC Bartok said:


> I agree with a lot of the above! Alexander Gibson's cycle on Chandos is very often unfairly overlooked, a real shame. You got two of the best individual performance there, but his 7th is very fine as well.


He also recorded Sibelius with the Royal Philharmonic for Collins.


----------



## Pat Fairlea

CnC Bartok said:


> ^^^ Have you heard the Collins set? I know they're mono, but they are very good mono, and I have no problem with the sound quality (and I do in many other instances of old recordings)
> 
> Do give them a go. These are the best Sibelius out there!


Yes. For sure. Budget price mono recordings, bargain basement even in their day, but very, very good.


----------



## starthrower

I bought cheap copies of the Gibson/Scottish Natl Orchestra on Chandos.


----------



## joen_cph

starthrower said:


> I bought cheap copies of the Gibson/Scottish Natl Orchestra on Chandos.


I haven't heard their Sibelius, but really like their recording of Stravinsky symphonies & suppose their Sibelius must be good too.


----------



## starthrower

Gibson recorded Sibelius with the Scottish Orchestra, and the Royal Philharmonic. The only one I compared is no.2 and I prefer the Scottish. The other version is too speedy for my taste.


----------



## janxharris

Isn't this just a gorgeous reading of the 5th - Hugh Wolff / Frankfurt Radio Symphony? One might say even more so considering the neglect of Sibelius's music in Germany until recently.


----------



## cougarjuno

I'm also in the Gibson / Scottish camp. I prefer these Chandos recordings more than any other Sibelius recordings I've heard.


----------



## hoodjem

Koussevitsky
Barbirolli
Vanska


----------



## Josquin13

The Gibson recordings that I'd strongly recommend are the performances that he conducted late in his career of the Sibelius Symphonies 1 & 2 (plus Karelia Suite, Op. 11), with the Uppsala Chamber Orchestra. I've only been able to find them on You Tube & as MP3 downloads on Amazon, but they're wonderful, & show Gibson at his best as a Sibelius conductor:





https://www.amazon.com/Jean-Sibeliu...xander+Gibson+sibelius&qid=1575701495&sr=8-17

I also enjoy Gibson's 2 CD Sibelius Tone Poem set on Chandos, which hasn't been mentioned yet, either, unless I missed it:

https://www.amazon.com/Sibelius-Ton...one+poems&qid=1575701422&s=music&sr=8-1-fkmr1
https://www.amazon.com/Finlandia-Je...s_browse-bin:Alexander+Gibson&s=music&sr=1-15


----------



## Merl

Josquin13 said:


> The Gibson recordings that I'd strongly recommend are the performances that he conducted late in his career of the Sibelius Symphonies 1 & 2 (plus Karelia Suite, Op. 11), with the Uppsala Chamber Orchestra. I've only been able to find them on You Tube & as MP3 downloads on Amazon, but they're wonderful, & show Gibson at his best as a Sibelius conductor:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Jean-Sibeliu...xander+Gibson+sibelius&qid=1575701495&sr=8-17
> 
> I also enjoy Gibson's 2 CD Sibelius Tone Poem set on Chandos, which hasn't been mentioned yet, either, unless I missed it:
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Sibelius-Ton...one+poems&qid=1575701422&s=music&sr=8-1-fkmr1
> https://www.amazon.com/Finlandia-Je...s_browse-bin:Alexander+Gibson&s=music&sr=1-15


Agreed, i rate those Gibson performances too. As a side note, those Uppsala performances of symphonies 1&2 are available on Deezer and Spotify. I like them a lot.


----------



## Josquin13

Merl--Yes, but frustratingly I've never seen them available on CD, which is a pity.

I forgot to mention that Gibson also recorded a wonderful Scenes Historiques, Suites 1 & 2, and Rakastava & Valse Lyrique for Chandos, too (which you probably already know): https://www.amazon.com/Sibelius-Sce...+chandos+scenes&qid=1575734181&s=music&sr=1-1. There's also a 1959 Sibelius 5th & Karelia Suite from Gibson & the LSO on Decca "legends" that is well regarded: http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=57829

To my mind, Gibson was a conductor that makes quicker tempi work well in Sibelius' music (at times, he almost sounds like a Finnish conductor), & I'd say more so than Neemi Jaarvi (another conductor that favors brisk tempi in Sibelius), for the most part--especially in the tone poems, as I don't overly care for Jaarvi's tone poem recordings on DG.


----------



## Lucio

I personally like Esa-Pekka Salonen and Karajan above all. Salonen has recorded all symphonies with the Orchestra of the Swedish Radio, but there is on You Tube a Second with the Vienna Philharmonic (absolutely unbeatable IMO, here he surpasses anybody else by miles) and the Fifth with the Bavarian Radio Orchestra, also the top performance. The rendition of the swedish orchestra, though not a world-class orchestra, is anyhow very good, and Salonen is able to extract the best out of it. I like his vision of Sibelius, he gets the musical message like nobody else. I don't agree, instead, on the negative comments I read here about Karajan. His 4th, 5th and 6th are outstanding and equalled only by Salonen (always IMO, of course). True that he cares very much about sound, with "ultra-smooth, rounded off, excessive legato" (as one commentator said), but he dugs deep into the score as much as Salonen does. This is exactly what I feel is missing in Vanska and Segerstam: they create nice and magic atmospheres but ... where is the music?


----------



## Lucio

Heck148 said:


> A fine Finnish conductor who has not been mentioned, but deserves praise, IMO, is Essa-Pekka Salonen. He produced some fine Sibelius recordings with the LAPO - Kullervo - and Four Legends, En Saga....really fine performances...His En Saga is right up there with Toscanini's. and his Lemminkainen's Return is excellent also - in league with Barbirolli's wonderful account, and with Toscanini's.
> I also remember a CSO broadcast he did of Sibelius Sym #5 - a terrific performance, that was very much in the style of Bernstein's non pareil NYPO version


In fact, I was quite shocked at not seeing Salonen mentioned among the others. He is one of the world's leading conductors (on par with Muti, Barenboim or Thielemann) and he is ... finnish! You can find all Sibelius' symphonies on YouTube with the Orchestra of the Swedish Radio, in a recording made in year 2000 (perhaps a series of concerts). This is not a world-class orchestra but under his baton it reaches an extraordinarily good level. Then, you can find the 2nd with the Vienna Philharmonic and, until some time ago, the 5th with the Bavarian Radio State Orchestra (the orchestra of Carlos Kleiber!), both far superior, IMO, to Vanska, Segerstam or anybody else. Salonen makes the music flow and is so pleasant to listen to, while being also extremely attentive to all analytical details of the musical structure. To me, the performances of Vanska or Segerstam sound static, almost stagnating, I don't enjoy them as much as I enjoy Salonen's. Besides, I regard him also as the N.1 living conductor in Beethoven, in fact the best since the demise of Carlos Kleiber.

In Sibelius, I like also Karajan, I don't agree with the negative comments about him in this forum. As a good third I would see Barbirolli.


----------



## Heck148

I've heard the Salonen/SwedishRSO Sibelius#5...it's well-conducted, playing is ok...nobody matches Bernstein/NYPO in Sibelius 5, it's really incredible, no one else gets the closing pages as clearly and powerfully....I never choose Karajan, esp for Sibelius....wrong sound, wrong concept of articulation. I heard a karajan/BPO Sibelius 2 on youtube...not terrible, but the finale was just too slow, logy...playing was decent, not the overwhelming power you get from Chicago, NYPO, NBC, LSO, but still quite good.


----------



## mikeh375

Heck148 said:


> I've heard the Salonen/SwedishRSO Sibelius#5...it's well-conducted, playing is ok...nobody matches Bernstein/NYPO in Sibelius 5, it's really incredible, no one else gets the closing pages as clearly and powerfully....I never choose Karajan, esp for Sibelius....wrong sound, wrong concept of articulation. I heard a karajan/BPO Sibelius 2 on youtube...not terrible, but the finale was just too slow, logy...playing was decent, not the overwhelming power you get from Chicago, NYPO, NBC, LSO, but still quite good.


I've just been reading about how Rattle managed to coerce a Sibelius cycle with the Berlin Phil a few years back during his tenure with them and how eventually they came round to liking the music. Their style of ensemble playing eventually locked into Sibelius and success was achieved despite long held reservations. I've not heard the Karajan, but believe there haven't been any cycles since him with the Berlin Phil until Rattle, such was the low-esteem Sibelius was held in (allegedly).


----------



## Becca

mikeh375 said:


> I've just been reading about how Rattle managed to coerce a Sibelius cycle with the Berlin Phil a few years back during his tenure with them and how eventually they came round to liking the music. Their style of ensemble playing eventually locked into Sibelius and success was achieved despite long held reservations. I've not heard the Karajan, but believe there haven't been any cycles since him with the Berlin Phil until Rattle, such was the low-esteem Sibelius was held in (allegedly).


I remember hearing Rattle say that when they did the first cycle, it was the first time that the 3rd had ever been performed by the BPO.

As to the low esteem, remember that the personnel in the orchestra has had an almost complete turnover since HvK's years with a much larger percentage of non-Germans, most of whom had probably played (and even enjoyed?!) Sibelius.


----------



## mikeh375

Becca said:


> I remember hearing Rattle say that when they did the first cycle, it was the first time that the 3rd had ever been performed by the BPO.
> 
> As to the low esteem, remember that the personnel in the orchestra has had an almost complete turnover since HvK's years with a much larger percentage of non-Germans, most of whom had probably played (and even enjoyed?!) Sibelius.


Yes, of course Becca, I should have mentioned the relatively recent personnel changes post HvK which helped in establishing Sibelius. True to say though that there was definitely an under appreciation of Sibelius prior to that. Not surprising really given how far away he is in aesthetic from the German masters. (I've just grabbed the score for the 3rd off my shelf and am going to listen to it as I haven't heard it myself in ages.....Rattle with the CBSO.)


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

mikeh375 said:


> I've just been reading about how Rattle managed to coerce a Sibelius cycle with the Berlin Phil a few years back during his tenure with them and how eventually they came round to liking the music. Their style of ensemble playing eventually locked into Sibelius and success was achieved despite long held reservations. I've not heard the Karajan, but believe there haven't been any cycles since him with the Berlin Phil until Rattle, such was the low-esteem Sibelius was held in (allegedly).


The Rattle cycle is a very interesting one. Very much "thick, romantic" Sibelius, but I do enjoy it to a certain extent. The BPO strings often tend to drown out the complex textures- there definitely isn't the same sense of playing tight and linear as there is with the Nordic conductors. I think Karajan did a better job at balancing and lightening up the sound- the sonic portraits he paints in the 4th and 7th Symphonies are mighty impressive (really almost impressionistic), though they are not my favorite interpretations as you don't get the sense of narrative and struggle you do with Berglund, Gibson, Bernstein, etc. Rattle provides the weight that Karajan is missing. Generally, I appreciate Rattle for willing to be so idiosyncratic and experimental with the music in an era where most conductors take the safe route.


----------



## Becca

Rattle did two Sibelius cycles with the BPO so it would be interesting to compare them and see how much they changed ... if at all.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Becca said:


> Rattle did two Sibelius cycles with the BPO so it would be interesting to compare them and see how much they changed ... if at all.


Interesting... he must have really wanted to sell the BPO on the music! Not all that often that the same conductor and orchestra repeat a cycle. Spotify only has the one from 2015.


----------



## Becca

The previous was from 2010. It was not made available on CD but can be seen in the Digital Concert Hall archive.


----------



## vtpoet

Really intereteing reading this thread. There's something I've always liked/loved about Sibelius. His was some of the first music I bought on CD. Namely, I bought the first Järvi cycle when the CDs still had warnings on them suggesting that the CDs fidelity was so faithful that you could blow your stereo to smithereens. I never did, but I'm always nervous playing those CDs. I recently bought the Naxos complete Incidental by Segerstam [sic?] and heard some music I've never heard before. I listened to Jedermann for the first time all the way through as I was writing. God. Almighty. That second to last movement (I think---I don't have the CD in front of me) is goddamn relentless. It's just pure desolation. I was almost ready to hang myself after that. Oddly, it makes me want to listen to it again.

Can't explain that at all.


----------



## Heck148

For me, Sibelius succeeds best when a full spectrum of tones/timbres are presented and encourage by the conductor....[I'm going to do a Sibelius posting on "My favorite pieces to perform" thread....]

Sibelius must have a big, husky, even gruff tone, at times...I want to hear a big, rough, full string sound, growling and snarling basses, bassoons, low brass...blazing, searing higher brass and winds, full-throated woodwinds....not always, of course, because Sibelius at times can require very gentle, _dolce _sound, and essentially everything in between on the tonal spectrum...
for me, Bernstein/NYPO really hit it on the $$...Toscanini, Stokowski are really great, too, and so are the English - Barbirolli, Gibson....Salonen does an excellent job as well - his various tone poems with LAPO on Sony are excellent recordings, some top contenders...


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Heck148 said:


> For me, Sibelius succeeds best when a full spectrum of tones/timbres are presented and encourage by the conductor....[I'm going to do a Sibelius posting on "My favorite pieces to perform" thread....]
> 
> Sibelius must have a big, husky, even gruff tone, at times...I want to hear a big, rough, full string sound, growling and snarling basses, bassoons, low brass...blazing, searing higher brass and winds, full-throated woodwinds....not always, of course, because Sibelius at times can require very gentle, _dolce _sound, and essentially everything in between on the tonal spectrum...
> for me, Bernstein/NYPO really hit it on the $$...Toscanini, Stokowski are really great, too, and so are the English - Barbirolli, Gibson....Salonen does an excellent job as well - his various tone poems with LAPO on Sony are excellent recordings, some top contenders...


Bernstein/NY is my favorite cycle as well. There is much passion and pathos, but it is guided by the exquisite phrasing and control, and the vivacious colors that the NYPO reveals in their playing. There is one particular drawn-out phrase on a grinding dissonance in the introduction to the 7th Symphony that Lenny handles so brilliantly that I find myself unable to breath. His 4th and 5th are my absolute favorites. No one brought out the big, sweeping contours of Sibelius's soundscapes in full Technicolor like Lenny.

I will also mention the Gibson/RSO cycle because it seems not to be brought up as much. Few have matched Gibson's conducting in terms of intensity and contrast. The brass is lights-out- almost as mammoth as the famous Chicago brass. If you want to have your hair blown back, this is what you should turn to!


----------



## Guest

Brahmsian Colors said:


> I see individuals' choices for "best" "worst" and "in between" are all over the map. Anyone looking for advice on what to choose or what to avoid might want to listen for her/himself to as much as they feel they need to of various conductors' performances on You Tube. Aside from interpretations, beware of excessively bright or muddy sound quality.


Many members talk about 'getting' Sibelius, or 'understanding' this or that aspect of his works. But that presumes first having a sense of what Sibelius is 'about' before even hearing him! How can that be right? It's that presumption that leads to statements about, for example, Bernstein being either wonderful or awful.

Alternatively, what members actually mean is that they have got used to one interpretation which has formed their sense of what Sibelius is about, and then measure others against that interpretation.

I wonder too at the idea that there is a 'Nordic' (even narrowly Finnish) interpretation. Of course, if the conductor is Nordic, is that being automatically read into the performance?

A further challenge is actually finding the best recording/edition. Bernstein/NYPO seems to come in at least three editions - so which one should I be sampling if I want to give Lenny the best opportunity to show his stuff?


----------



## flamencosketches

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Bernstein/NY is my favorite cycle as well. There is much passion and pathos, but it is guided by the exquisite phrasing and control, and the vivacious colors that the NYPO reveals in their playing. There is one particular drawn-out phrase on a grinding dissonance in the introduction to the 7th Symphony that Lenny handles so brilliantly that I find myself unable to breath. His 4th and 5th are my absolute favorites. No one brought out the big, sweeping contours of Sibelius's soundscapes in full Technicolor like Lenny.
> 
> I will also mention the Gibson/RSO cycle because it seems not to be brought up as much. Few have matched Gibson's conducting in terms of intensity and contrast. The brass is lights-out- almost as mammoth as the famous Chicago brass. If you want to have your hair blown back, this is what you should turn to!


I really want to hear Bernstein's Sibelius cycle, but damn, why is it so expensive? The "Remastered Edition" on Sony is going for $100+. Outside of that, all I can find is the old "Royal Edition" which I would like to avoid if possible.


----------



## wkasimer

flamencosketches said:


> I really want to hear Bernstein's Sibelius cycle, but damn, why is it so expensive? The "Remastered Edition" on Sony is going for $100+. Outside of that, all I can find is the old "Royal Edition" which I would like to avoid if possible.


You could buy this:









You'd get the Sibelius symphonies, plus 50+ discs of additional music.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

flamencosketches said:


> I really want to hear Bernstein's Sibelius cycle, but damn, why is it so expensive? The "Remastered Edition" on Sony is going for $100+. Outside of that, all I can find is the old "Royal Edition" which I would like to avoid if possible.


It's definitely worth sampling a symphony or two from Bernstein before purchasing it. The style is definitely not for everyone, as evidenced through the rather polarized opinions on this thread. If you like it reined-back, straightforward, and wintery like Vanska and Segerstam, you may find Lenny drives you nuts. He messes a lot with the tempi and the flow of the music to milk it for drama. I find it highly captivating, but it's definitely not for everyone! I recommend listening to the finale of the 5th or the first few minutes of the 7th to get a taste of his style.


----------



## flamencosketches

Allegro Con Brio said:


> It's definitely worth sampling a symphony or two from Bernstein before purchasing it. The style is definitely not for everyone, as evidenced through the rather polarized opinions on this thread. If you like it reined-back, straightforward, and wintery like Vanska and Segerstam, you may find Lenny drives you nuts. He messes a lot with the tempi and the flow of the music to milk it for drama. I find it highly captivating, but it's definitely not for everyone! I recommend listening to the finale of the 5th or the first few minutes of the 7th to get a taste of his style.


Lenny is one of my favorite conductors. I usually trust his interpretations even if it's not in the style I'm accustomed to with a given composer.


----------



## Enthusiast

Allegro Con Brio said:


> It's definitely worth sampling a symphony or two from Bernstein before purchasing it. The style is definitely not for everyone, as evidenced through the rather polarized opinions on this thread. If you like it reined-back, straightforward, and wintery like Vanska and Segerstam, you may find Lenny drives you nuts.


I think the sets that polarise opinions are often the better ones! The ones everyone likes tend to be a touch bland (but now I have polarised them as well!). I don't think anyone sensible would say that there is only one way to play Sibelius or only one Sibelius sound world - he is bigger than that.

BTW, I certainly wouldn't put Vanska (either set - like the two from Bernstein, the two Vanska sets are very different from each other) with Segerstam for Sibelius. Segerstam tends to neglect the narrative thread (while conjuring up some great sounds) but Vanska pays scrupulous attention to the narrative and internal logic of the music.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Enthusiast said:


> I think the sets that polarise opinions are often the better ones! The ones everyone likes tend to be a touch bland (but now I have polarised them as well!). I don't think anyone sensible would say that there is only one way to play Sibelius or only one Sibelius sound world - he is bigger than that.
> 
> BTW, I certainly wouldn't put Vanska (either set - like the two from Bernstein, the two Vanska sets are very different from each other) with Segerstam for Sibelius. Segerstam tends to neglect the narrative thread (while conjuring up some great sounds) but Vanska pays scrupulous attention to the narrative and internal logic of the music.


Fully agreed. Just as in any music, we do it dire injustice if we say there's only one "correct" way to interpret it. I like to think of Vanska (the Lahti cycle; haven't dipped too much into the MN cycle even if it is my home orchestra) as painting abstract, modernist portraits of the musical landscapes. Very lean and pared-down. I like it best in the 4th Symphony. Bernstein paints in full, rich color like a giant fresco. Berglund is somewhere in between- a perfect balance of narrative structure and sonic beauty. There is lushness but also wildness. Superbly creative interpretations. Segerstam has never struck me as being terribly interesting, but I recall enjoying his 5th. I can't say I've ever heard a Sibelius performance that I've truly disliked. I'm going to try some deep listening with Vanska/MN, Ashkenazy, and Barbirolli and see what they offer.


----------



## Becca

While I agree with the comments about not only being one way to play things, your description of Bernstein's way does turn me off ... but that's just me.

As to Sibelius conductors, definitely add Alexander Gibson to your list as a number of his are at the top of my pile.

Re HvK ... I haven't listened to his Berlin recordings in a very long time but his 1950's Philharmonia recordings of the 2nd and 5th are high on my list. Personally I think some of Karajan's best work was done back then.


----------



## Becca

While it is still early days to be making much in the way of comments, I have been very impressed by Santtu-Mathias Rouvali at Gothenberg. His recording of the 1st is very good and he did a great concert of Kullervo. A concert of the 4th should now be on the gsoplay.se site but I haven't looked yet.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Becca said:


> While I agree with the comments about not only being one way to play things, your description of Bernstein's way does turn me off ... but that's just me.
> 
> As to Sibelius conductors, definitely add Alexander Gibson to your list as a number of his are at the top of my pile.
> 
> Re HvK ... I haven't listened to his Berlin recordings in a very long time but his 1950's Philharmonia recordings of the 2nd and 5th are high on my list. Personally I think some of Karajan's best work was done back then.


Yes, Gibson is probably my third favorite cycle after Bernstein and Berglund/Bournemouth. He makes all the symphonies sound so epic- even the relatively layed-back 3rd Symphony is given a magnificently full-blooded treatment. I will have to check out those Karajan/Philharmonia recordings- would be very interesting to see how the style that he became known for in Berlin compares to his early conducting.

On the topic of "historical" (mono era) Sibelius recordings, here are a few favorites in my limited experience:

Collins- The whole cycle is outstanding. He's definitely a bit faster and shiftier than most, but I find his conception of rhythm and phrasing absolutely perfect. His 2nd is one of my favorites. The late mono sound is very good too.

Beecham- The stereo 7th is probably his most famous Sibelius recording and displays his later relaxed, improvisatory conducting style. But I think it is a tad too genial for such a monumental work. There is a live recording he did of the 2nd from, I think, 1943, that has white-hot intensity.

Koussevitzky- His 7th just might be my favorite version of one of my favorite pieces of music. It's really one of those that has to be heard in order to understand what it's all about.


----------



## flamencosketches

Lately I have been really enjoying the Petri Sakari/Iceland Symphony cycle on Naxos. I've heard it called the "poor man's Vänskä/Lahti" and there may be truth in that, but oddly I am not much for the Vänskä recordings of the symphonies. That being said I think Vänskä is really great with some of the lesser works of Sibelius such as Luonnotar, the op.19 Impromptu, Väinön Virsi etc.–he performs them in a way that makes them sound like great music, up there with the symphonies. I've heard none of Segerstam but the descriptions in this thread make it sound like something that I would not like. I'll check out his recordings some day. I believe he's made two cycle recordings too, no?


----------



## Becca

The Rouvali/Gothenburg 4th is now available on the GSO site. It is free to access and typically the videos are available for a month or so.

https://www.gso.se/en/gsoplay/video/symphony-no-4/

His concert performances of the 1st and Kullervo are both on Vimeo


----------



## starthrower

I say give it a little time and Sony will re-issue the Bernstein cycle again. They will be milking the Bernstein cow forever. In the meantime I've got Vanska, Gibson, and Berglund to enjoy.


----------



## kanishknishar

Rattle seems to be disliked for Sibelius in these forums. Putting aside his BPO 2015 cycle, what's wrong with his performances?

I would appreciate a more detailed response than just 'fussy' or 'micro management.'

Like an unnecessary rubato before a climax that breaks the flow..


----------



## Heck148

Allegro Con Brio said:


> On the topic of "historical" (mono era) Sibelius recordings, here are a few favorites in my limited experience:
> Beecham- The stereo 7th is probably his most famous Sibelius recording and displays his later relaxed, improvisatory conducting style. But I think it is a tad too genial for such a monumental work.


Agree about Beecham Sibelius #7. ok, not great...
for a terrific historical entry - 
Sym #2 - Toscanini/NBC from 1940 - really excellent, one of the best, all-Sibelius program also included a dynamite "Leminkainen's Return", which is right up there with Barbirolli/Halle. Sir John benefits from better recorded sound, both terrific performances.


----------



## Enthusiast

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Fully agreed. Just as in any music, we do it dire injustice if we say there's only one "correct" way to interpret it. I like to think of Vanska (the Lahti cycle; haven't dipped too much into the MN cycle even if it is my home orchestra) as painting abstract, modernist portraits of the musical landscapes. Very lean and pared-down. I like it best in the 4th Symphony. Bernstein paints in full, rich color like a giant fresco. Berglund is somewhere in between- a perfect balance of narrative structure and sonic beauty. There is lushness but also wildness. Superbly creative interpretations. Segerstam has never struck me as being terribly interesting, but I recall enjoying his 5th. I can't say I've ever heard a Sibelius performance that I've truly disliked. I'm going to try some deep listening with Vanska/MN, Ashkenazy, and Barbirolli and see what they offer.


I also have heard few Sibelius symphony performances that I don't like. Good luck with the Vanska/MN set - I found the first issue (symphonies 2 and 5) a bit disappointing but the others are something special to me. Barbirolli's set is very good (an excellent 7) but disappointed some when it came out - some listeners felt he had done them better in concerts. Have you heard the Rozhdestvensky - it comes close to being a favourite for me.


----------



## Heck148

Enthusiast said:


> ....Barbirolli's set is very good (an excellent 7) but disappointed some when it came out - some listeners felt he had done them better in concerts. Have you heard the Rozhdestvensky - it comes close to being a favourite for me.


Rozh'sky's #7 is a real hoot - it is very good, one of my favorites - and the big trombone solo truly memorable!! :lol: :lol:
early 60s Russian style - loud as hell, very edgy, blatty, big vibrato....the guy is just blowing his *ss off the whole time....[_subtlety_ is not a major factor here!! :lol:]


----------



## Enthusiast

^ That's it! But he also does the quieter ones (3 and 6) exceptionally well. I've got the Minnesota Vanska for the ultimate in subtlety!

That trombone solo in 7 always makes me think of a drunk singing in the street in the early hours - I think it was the way Barbirolli did it that first made me hear it that way - perhaps an image that fits for Sibelius.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Enthusiast said:


> I also have heard few Sibelius symphony performances that I don't like. Good luck with the Vanska/MN set - I found the first issue (symphonies 2 and 5) a bit disappointing but the others are something special to me. Barbirolli's set is very good (an excellent 7) but disappointed some when it came out - some listeners felt he had done them better in concerts. Have you heard the Rozhdestvensky - it comes close to being a favourite for me.


I just sampled some of Vanska/MN. Will have to go more in-depth later, but I definitely already like it better than the Lahti cycle. I totally get it when you say that Vanska has a gift for spinning a narrative in the music. His performances, in my opinion, are somewhat by-the-book interpretively, but he's able to integrate all the various ideas together into a beautiful whole. And I like the more full-bodied sound of the MN Orchestra better than the straight-laced playing of the Finns- some great husky winds and smashing climaxes going on there. Great stuff there as far I can tell. I have tickets to see Vanska do Mahler 9 this year and am really excited to experience his wonderful conducting live.

Barbirolli is not on Spotify, so I may look at purchasing it in the near future. Right now I'm listening to Rozhdostvensky's 2nd off YouTube. Man, what a committed performance! Rough-edged and craggy but that's never a bad thing in Sibelius. I truly hear the raw poetry of this symphony shine through. So many different potentials for interpretation!

Rozhdostvensky is now probably my favorite 2nd. I tip my cap to Enthusiast for the recommendation, but now I will likely prioritize purchasing his complete cycle over Barbirolli's. Just have to hear more!


----------



## Becca

The Barbirolli/Halle cycle is a bit mixed but you should most definitely hear the Barbirolli/Royal Philharmonic 2nd. I had heard many great things about it and it sure lived up to the hype.


----------



## kanishknishar

Allegro Con Brio said:


> I just sampled some of Vanska/MN. Will have to go more in-depth later, but I definitely already like it better than the Lahti cycle. I totally get it when you say that Vanska has a gift for spinning a narrative in the music. His performances, in my opinion, are somewhat by-the-book interpretively, but he's able to integrate all the various ideas together into a beautiful whole. And I like the more full-bodied sound of the MN Orchestra better than the straight-laced playing of the Finns- some great husky winds and smashing climaxes going on there. Great stuff there as far I can tell. I have tickets to see Vanska do Mahler 9 this year and am really excited to experience his wonderful conducting live.
> 
> Barbirolli is not on Spotify, so I may look at purchasing it in the near future. Right now I'm listening to Rozhdostvensky's 2nd off YouTube. Man, what a committed performance! Rough-edged and craggy but that's never a bad thing in Sibelius. I truly hear the raw poetry of this symphony shine through. So many different potentials for interpretation!
> 
> Rozhdostvensky is now probably my favorite 2nd. I tip my cap to Enthusiast for the recommendation, but now I will likely prioritize purchasing his complete cycle over Barbirolli's. Just have to hear more!


I heard Vanska performing Brahms' 2nd with Orchestre de la Suisse Romande. An unforgettable experience.


----------



## perdido34

Some of my favorite Sibelius performances are with Szell/Cleveland: #2 from his last concert in Toyko, and a live #7. I also like Maazel/Vienna in #4 and Barbirolli/RPO in #2.


----------



## Merl

Becca said:


> The Barbirolli/Halle cycle is a bit mixed but you should most definitely hear the Barbirolli/Royal Philharmonic 2nd. I had heard many great things about it and it sure lived up to the hype.


I'm not keen on much of Barbirolli's Sibelius. I like his 1st and 7th but have never been mad about the rest. It tends to drag a bit.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

perdido34 said:


> Some of my favorite Sibelius performances are with Szell/Cleveland: #2 from his last concert in Toyko, and a live #7. I also like Maazel/Vienna in #4 and Barbirolli/RPO in #2.


I also love Szell in the 2nd. For some reason, I always find the Cleveland woodwinds sound different- a very sparkly, vigorous sound that really highlights some wonderful moments in this symphony, like the complex thematic writing in the first movement and the trio of the scherzo. I have heard parts of the Barbirolli/RPO 2nd, and recall it being a very unique, thickly-textured, patiently-unfolded reading. Almost Mahlerian, which makes sense considering his intimate relationship with that composer's music. It didn't knock my socks off like Rozhdostvensky, Beecham '43, or Gibson, though.


----------

