# Merl's Beethoven Symphony Cycle Reviews Pt.17 (a retrospective one)



## Merl

Over the past few years I've wanted to revisit a group of cycles that Granate initially reviewed or have been flagged to me or I'd skipped over as they had made little or no impression on me, first time around. It's important to keep an open mind in life and discerning and devoted listeners should be willing, in my book, to change their mind (I have a particular dislike for trotting out the same old lines about recordings probably only heard once, 15 years ago). Did I call it right the first time or was there something getting in the way of me hearing these sets properly in the first place? Whatever, I've listened to all these sets again properly in the past 6 months of lockdown in comparison to reference versions (I used Wand's and Blomstedt's Dresden sets as a reference as they are generally highly thought of). This time there's a slightly different format as I'm comparing the different accounts symphony by symphony but I will give them a general rating at the end in line with my previous reviews. Let the listening begin.....

*The sets for re-review*

Bernstein / VPO








Vanska / Minnesota








Keilberth / Bamberg. Hamburg, BPO, NHK (I'll discuss this last one at the end).








Barenboim / West-Eastern Divan (Beethoven for All)








Abbado / BPO (Rome)








*Symphony 1*
Listening to these again I'm struck by Vanska's detail and forward momentum. He shapes the symphony beautifully and draws impressive playing from his orchestra. Keilberth's older, bigger sound is positive and he offers a firm vision whilst Abbado is fleeter but uneven across the 4 movements. Bernstein labours over some phrases but the VPO play eloquently. Barenboim takes too long to get to the point and his ebbing and flowing approach doesn't suit the 1st so well so he loses momentum at key moments.

*Symphony 2*
Keilberth's forces are very scrappy in the 2nd even though his pacing and general realisation is good and Vanska is slower here and doesn't quite get to grips with this one either, although you can't fault the Minnesota orchestra's committed playing. Abbado and the BPO are very controlled and concise in the first 3 movements and then pick up the pace superbly for the final movement and this is a fine version. The VPO are consistently fine for Bernstein and at times their playing is gorgeous whilst Barenboim toys with the tempo to its detriment and creates textures that are a little too thick and unsuitable here for the music.

*Symphony 3*
I find Barenboim totally flatfooted in the Eroica. His funeral march drags and the scherzo doesn't skip and bounce as it should. Bernstein is slightly more successful but again his vision of the Eroica is too drawn out and laboured with not enough umph where needed even if the VPO play with great beauty. Abbado gives a nice, sensible, interesting account too but the slight winner here is Vanska, who is sharper, more driven (the jolt of the opening is quite arresting) and although far from brisk the symphony never lags in his hands. Keilberth, with the Hamburgers is enjoyable but again his funeral march drags a little and loses momentum but his scherzo is lively and engaging and his final movement powerful (even if there's some questionable brass playing).

*Symphony 4*
Vanska starts very slowly and deliberately in the 4th (a bit too slowly for my tastes) but there's no doubt the final 2 movements are much better and there's some lovely detail in the finale. For Bernstein the VPO's brass and woodwinds shine in his 4th. It's a broad reading but some of the playing is outstanding (those woodwinds in the final movement are glorious) even if it gets a little bogged down at times. Keilberth lacks inner detail although his conception is zippier than the previous 2 and he doesn't let the rhythms flag. Barenboim's very Klemperer-inspired approach works to good effect in the 4th and in the adagio he shapes it splendidly then slightly undoes the good work in the allegro and final movement, where he needs more drive from his players. Abbado's quicker and more surging interpretation is the winner here. The greater drive of the BPO pays dividends and there's some delightful woodwind playing throughout but it's Abbado's vision that is the winner overall.

*Symphony 5*
How gloriously the BPO's brass resound in the finale of the 5th. Elsewhere this is a very decent account too from Abbado. Der...der....der...der....oh dear! Poor Lenny labours the opening big choon to such an extent it's like labour pains. Only the VPO brass try to rescue this rather pedestrian 5th from the doldrums yet they cant save it (and there's some questionable ensemble in the allegro too). This is Beethoven's 5th The Lenny Remix and it's all too slow and boring. Keilberth is much too broad in the opening movement too and things don't improve from there until a rousing finale but it's all too late by then. Again, this is Barenboim's attempt to mimic Klempy but this orchestra aren't up to the task. He drags out the 2nd movement turgidly and tries to rescue it in the finale but his constant pulling of tempo is infuriating and he loses all momentum. A very poor account by any standard. Again, though, it's Vanska that steals the show. Listen to those skipping strings in the allegro con brio or the massed strings in the final movement. Some delicious playing in what is by far the best 5th in this lot.

*Symphony 6*
First up and it's Barenboim and he does well here. Nice powerful storm too tops a fine performance. Keilberth's Bambergers are a bit iffy on the ensemble front (especially in the Storm) and not up to the task, even if K's overall take on the Pastoral is not too bad. Bernstein is in much better form here backed by a beautifully on-point VPO who are balanced beautifully in this recording (lovely timpani / winds in a terrific storm). Abbado and the BPO turn in a very chamber-ish performance (love those woodwinds) before giving us a violent, snappy, broody storm to very good effect. Vanska too is as good here, with great pacing and he his storm is helped by a terrific recorded sound.

*Symphony 7*
To my favourite symphony and tbf nobody messes the 7th up completely. Abbado is the elephant in the room here with brisk speeds but plenty of bite. The BPO are charming in the allegretto and I'm convinced by his final movement but Keilberth with the same orchestra starts and ends with a whimper and fails to sell it to me. Barenboim starts of well with a powerful first movement then gives a decent allegretto before a joyless presto and more spirited finale finish things off but the WEDO aren't up the level of his Berlin cycle and run out of steam. Vanska has some excellent inner detail throughout his performance and whilst it's firmly in the traditional vein that's hardly a bad thing and he rounds things off superbly in the 4th movement but I'd like even more fire. Bernstein's 7th has power aplenty and the allegretto is quite beautiful. In fact Bernstain has this one. His presto is firm and fun and the big guns come out for a big-boned ending. It may not be the greatest 7th in the catalogue but it is a fine one.

*Symphony 8*
Barenboim is far too heavy in texture and unsure in the 8th and I didnt rate this account at all. The 8th sees Bernstein in good shape again. The final movement dances eloquently in his hands but the star of the show is the VPO who, in this remastered version, sound even more sumptuous than before. Keilberth and the Hamburg orchestra only slightly blight their copybook in the final movement, for me, where the music isnt as much fun as it should be. Otherwise it's a good performance. Abbado drops in with a very good 8th that I thoroughly enjoyed but Vanska is outstanding in the 8th, for me. The whole symphony dances under those lovely Minnesota strings.

*Symphony 9*
To round things off it's the big one and Abbado impresses from the off. This is a damn fine 9th and (dare I say it) rather Karajanesque but I wish those timpanis were higher in the mix. He doesn't labour the adagio (thankfully)and the soloists and choir are spot on for a rousing ending. Great stuff! Vanska, in the 9th, is solid and assured and this is much better than I remember. The sound is terrific. Another very good one. Barenboim is, as always in the 9th, slower here than the others but he always does his 9ths a la Klempy / Furty. That's not the problem though. The fact remains, as willing and as well-intentioned as they are in the 9th, the WEDO are just not as good as their competition, which is a shame as the recording and account here are fine but there are moments of dodgy playing which spoil an otherwise decent account. I know this Bernstein 9th well. It's always been better than his scrappier New York 9th but the remaster has definitely improved the sound more. It's a damn fine 9th and some say one of the best around and whilst I don't endorse that claim it does sound better than ever. My one bugbear about this recording has always been that adagio. Yes it's beautiful, yes the VPO play it gorgeously but it's just too damn long! However he more than makes up for the schmaltzy adagio with a killer finale (there are few, if any better sung ones). Right, I've had to cheat a bit with Mr. Keilberth as his 'cycle' was always only 8 symphonies HOWEVER, I do have a 1965 live recording he made with the NHK so I'm throwing that in to even the score. What's it like? Well pretty hissy and quite average, tbh but at least he doesn't over-romaticise the adagio. However, the last movement is particularly well-balanced and there's some lovely choral work and it's given a very spirited ending.

So, what have I learned by revisiting this lot? Have I changed my mind? Has anyone risen in my estimation? Yes, I know that these are fairly well-known cycles but I've often unfairly given a few of these short shrift in my time on TC and I needed to redress the balance. So here's my final thoughts.

*Vanska*
I'd written this one off years ago probably due to the sound but I now have it in much better quality and it is indeed a very fine, traditional cycle in excellent sound. There's no duds in the set and some corkers (that 8th is excellent). So after years of giving this a harder time (I was never too hard on it) I can happily recommend it. By the way, if any critic ever says this is one of the brisker sets out there they are talking pish (I've read two reviews which say that). It's not.

_Grade: B+_

*Keilberth*
Tbh, I learned nothing new from playing this again. It's a satisfactory, unremarkable cycle and my opinion of it hasn't changed but it was good to revisit it, at least.

_Grade: C_

*Barenboim / WEDO*
This has always been Barenboim's 'Beethoven for no-one' cycle for me. I've always thought it was the undernourished and poorly performed baby brother of Barenboim's great Berlin cycle and my opinion of it has not changed one bit after hearing it again. It's well-recorded but the WEDO just don't have the chops to pull off Barenboim's Klemperesque conception and as a cycle it remains barely satisfactory.

_Grade: C-_

*Abbado / BPO*
I kind of gave up on Abbado's Beethoven (and Abbado in general) after his tedious Vienna cycle and the hit and miss withdrawn BPO set so revisiting this Rome cycle was good for me as I'd never really given it much of a chance but I was wrong not to as it is, indeed, a fine cycle. There's no bad performances and some are excellent (see above). I will be revisiting this one again soon as I really enjoyed it.

_Grade: B+_

*Bernstein / VPO*
And so to the difficult one. I've always wondered what the attraction was in this cycle. Of Lenny's two sets I much prefer his New York cycle (even though there's some shoddy playing on there) and have often called this cycle a 'schmaltzfest' (Lol). In truth I've never felt it was a poor set, I just never got why some rated it so highly. So do you think I've changed my mind about it? Well yes and no! Firstly the recent remaster has improved upon the sound a little(although, tbf, it was never a badly recorded set by any stretches of the imagination) and I preferred listening to this newly remastered cycle. Where I have changed my opinion is of Lenny's 6th, 7th and 8th which are far better than I remember them. I've always rated the 9th but felt that adagio was wayyyyy too long. Where I've not changed my opinion is that Lenny's 5th is awful (that milking of the big choon still makes me shudder), his 3rd over-wrought and the other 3 are kept ok by the VPO, who were just on fire in these recordings. I still wouldn't recommend this cycle. It's never been bad but it's still a bit too sweet for my tastes. I know I may get some flack for that comment but hey, it's just an opinion.

_Grade: B-_

So there you go. Apologies for the LvB cycle double post but I thought it imporatant that I redress the balance a little. Feel free to add your comments, as usual.

Previous reviews:
Merl's Beethoven Symphony Cycle Reviews Pt.16
Merl's Beethoven Symphony Cycle Reviews Pt15
Merl's Beethoven Symphony Cycle Reviews Pt14
Merl's Beethoven Symphony Cycles Pt13
Merl's Beethoven Symphony Cycle Reviews Pt12
Merl's Beethoven Syphony Cycle Reviews Pt11
Merl's Beethoven Symphony Cycle Reviews Pt10
Merl's Beethoven Symphony Cycle Reviews Pt9
Merl's Beethoven Symphony Cycle Reviews Pt8
Merl's Beethoven Symphony Cycle Reviews Pt7
Merl's Beethoven Symphony Cycle Reviews Pt6
Merl's Beethoven Symphony Cycle Reviews Pt5
Merl's Beethoven Symphony Cycle Reviews Pt4
Merl's Beethoven Symphony Cycle Reviews Pt3
Merl's Beethoven Symphony Cycle Review Pt2
Merl's Beethoven Symphony Cycle Reviews Pt1


----------



## gvn

A rough INDEX to the above.

Abbado / BPO B+ : Part 17
Albrecht / Yomiuri B : Part 2
Antonini / Basel B- : Part 10
Asahina / Osaka B : Part 2
Ashkenazy / NHK SO C : Part 11
Attanasi / Camerata Cassovia D : Part 9
Barenboim / WEDO C- : Part 17
Barshai / Moscow (1-8 only) C : Part 1
Batiz / Mexican State SO C : Part 9
Bernard / Park Avenue Chamber C : Part 15
Bernstein / VPO B- : Part 17
Blomstedt / Dresden A* : Part 15
Blomstedt / Leipzig Gewandhaus B : Part 4
Blunier / Beethoven Orchestra of Bonn A- : Part 16
Boyd / Manchester Camerata B+ : Part 7
Bruggen / Orchestra of 18th Century B / B+ : Part 13
Butt / LSO B- / B : Part 7
Chung / Tokyo PO B+ / A- : Part 14
Dausgaard / Swedish Chamber Orchestra B+ : Part 11
De Vriend / Netherlands SO A* : Part 11
Dohnanyi / Cleveland B : Part 1
Dorati / RPO C : Part 14
Drahos / Esterhazy B- : Part 1
Edlinger & Halasz / Zagreb Philharmonia & Czecho-Slovak RSO C : Part 4
Fedoseyev / Moscow RTV E? F? : Part 13
Ferencsik / Hungarian PO C : Part 10
Fischer, Adam / Danish Chamber Orchestra A* : Part 11
Fischer, Ivan / RCO (DVD) B : Part 3
Fruhbeck de Burgos / Danish National SO B : Part 10
Gielen / SWR (Hannsler) A- / A* : Part 6
Giulini / La Scala ('Giulini Conducts Beethoven' Symphonies 1-8 only) C : Part 10
Haselbock / Wiener Akademie A- : Part 14
Herreweghe / Royal Flemish PO C : Part 1
Hickox / Northern Sinfonia C : Part 3
Hisaishi / Nagano Chamber Orchestra B : Part 15
Iimori / Wurttembergische Philharmonie Reutlingen C- : Part 13
Janowski / WDRSO B- : Part 16
Jarvi / Bremen B+ : Part 4
Jordan / Orchestra of the Paris Opera (DVD) A- : Part 3
Jordan / Vienna Symphony Orchestra B+ : Part 12
Karajan / Philharmonia B : Part 8
Karajan / BPO (Live 1977) B+ : Part 9
Kegel / Dresden Philharmonie B- : Part 13
Keilberth C : Part 17
Kobayashi / Czech PO B : Part 2
Kord / Warsaw PO B- : Part 7
Krivine / Chambre Philharmonique B+ : Part 2
Kuhn / Bolzano-Trento Haydn Orchestra B : Part 13
Lan Shui / Copenhagen PO A- : Part 8
Lombard / Bordeaux Aquitaine B- : Part 7
Maag / Padova A- : Part 2
Maazel / Cleveland C : Part 6
Mackerras / RLPO B+ : Part 5
Mackerras / SCO B+ : Part 5
Marriner / ASMF D : Part 10
Masur / Leipzig Gewandhaus (DDD) B- : Part 6
Menuhin / Sinfonia Varsovia B : Part 4
Morris / LSO B- : Part 4
Nagano / Montreal SO B- : Part 9
Nanut et al. / Various (Denon) C : Part 12
Nelson / Ensemble Orchestral de Paris B- : Part 8
Nelsons / VPO B- : Part 12
Norrington / LCP B- : Part 5
Norrington / SWR Stuttgart A* : Part 5
Polizzi / Prague SO & Budapest SO D : Part 7
Rajski / Polish CO B- : Part 16
Rattle / BPO B+ : Part 2
Rogner / Yomiuri C : Part 8
Rosbaud / SWR SO B+ : Part 15
Sanderling, Kurt / Philharmonia B- : Part 3
Sanderling, Michael / Dresden Philharmonic A- : Part 12
Saraste / WDRSO B+ : Part 11
Scherchen / Lugano RTSI C / A- : Part 8
Skrowaczewski / Saarbrucken A* : Part 5
Stangel / Pocket Philharmonic Orchestra C : Part 6
Steinberg / Pittsburgh A- : Part 15
Suitner / Staatskapelle Berlin B+ : Part 14
Tennstedt / Various (Memories) Impossible to grade : Part 12
Tilson Thomas / English Chamber Orchestra C : Part 14
Trevino / Malmo SO B+ : Part 16
Van Zweden / Residentie Orchestra E : Part 16
Vanska B+ : Part 17
Vasary / Budapest SO B- : Part 9
Weller / CBSO B : Part 1
Wordsworth et al. / RPO B- : Part 3
Zinman / Tonnhalle B- : Part 6


Top ratings (A*) have been awarded to Blomstedt (Dresden), De Vriend, Adam Fischer, Norrington (SWR), and Skrowaczewski.


----------



## Kiki

Awesome review, Merl!!

Bernstein's VPO Beethoven has a special meaning for me, but not for musical reasons. No. 5 was my first music cassette, while Nos. 8&9 were my first LP (a double album). They were great introduction to classical music for me, but they have served their purpose; Nowadays I'm afraid they sit rather low down on my list of favourite recordings. I did get the remastered hi-res set, but only for nostalgic reason.

That reminds of me an interview of Chailly (when promoting his Beethoven cycle). The interviewer mentioned Bernstein's name, and he wrote Chailly's jaws dropped onto the floor; but when he suggested that Bernstein had a vision, Chailly seemed to agree. Of course musicians' words should not be taken for granted. Like most entrepreneurs, they talk nonsense and are mostly great liars for business reasons, so judge them in their music making instead. But is there a vision in Bernstein's VPO set? I'm not quite sure what exactly "vision" means here. A concept that is consistently implemented throughout the cycle? A unique voice that tells the performance apart from that of other performers? Then probably yes. The Bernstein/VPO set does sound idiosyncratic as in his late style.

That also reminds me of a youtube video of this set's remastering engineer explaining what he did with the finale of No. 9. Apart from re-mixing the multitracks for the finale, he also added the Concertgebouw reverb! (It was recorded at the Wiener Staatsoper.) So much so for the improvement in the sonic quality of the final product.

About the Barenboim/WEDO set. I bought the hi-res download immediately after it's been released. To put it politely, I'm not a happy customer. Honestly, this is mushy peas for me.

How many BPO Beethoven No. 9s are there from Abbado? The Salzburg/BPO No. 9 on Sony is beefy and natural. Old-style done right IMO. I also have a Berlin/BPO No. 9, that claimed to be recorded in 2000-APR in the booklet. It's much faster, but it sounds casual in many places, except the finale which is awesome. I don't have the Rome set, but I gather its No. 9 was recorded in Berlin, and the info I could find says it was recorded in 2000-MAY-01. I'm confused. The timings of the Rome (actually Berlin) No. 9 that I could find are virtually the same as the 2000-APR disc, off by a sec or two of probably silence. They should be the same recording, should they? It could be just another case of DG being casual with recording data, as they often have been.


----------



## jankofrulz

The violin is the most reassuring musical instrument. Compared to other stringed and bowed instruments, like viola, cello and double bass, the violin is the smallest instrument and generates the highest musical sounds.

If you can practice for drums, guitar or piano without a teacher, with online tutorials or on specialized forums, things change with the violin. You need someone to teach you how to place it correctly and how to use the bow on the strings.

Useful links:


----------



## Merl

jankofrulz said:


> The violin is the most reassuring musical instrument. Compared to other stringed and bowed instruments, like viola, cello and double bass, the violin is the smallest instrument and generates the highest musical sounds.
> 
> If you can practice for drums, guitar or piano without a teacher, with online tutorials or on specialized forums, things change with the violin. You need someone to teach you how to place it correctly and how to use the bow on the strings.
> 
> Useful links:


LOL, I think this may be in the wrong thread, jankofrulz.


----------



## Merl

Firstly, gvn, that must have took ages. Thanks for doing that list. 

Kiki, the Abbado Rome 9th is the same one from the earlier BPO cycle. The rest of the cycle was rerecorded. They couldn't afford to remake it so they used the old one. Lol. Seriously it was a fine 9th so it was pointless redoing it with the time and expense involved. As for the Barenboim / WEDO I can't speak for the hi-res download but I have the cds (unfortunately) and they sound fine. Slightly bass heavy but decent recordings.


----------



## jim prideaux

As Merl commented above gyn's list must have taken time and effort so I thought the least I could do was recognise that commitment ( by both gyn and Merl)by listening to two recordings of the 7th from the most highly rated cycles......Norrington and Skrowaczeski ......still might have to investigate the Paavo Jarvi and Blunier cycles though as I do like the idea of them!


----------



## gvn

Thank you both for your kind words. (But it's no effort indexing a set of documents so fascinating and so clearly laid out!)


----------



## CnC Bartok

gvn said:


> Thank you both for your kind words. (But it's no effort indexing a set of documents so fascinating and so clearly laid out!)


...or you're just a decent individual!

Looking through that list, though, it seems my three favoured "traditional" sets have not yet been considered for the Merl treatment. Strange that, seeing as none of the three are exactly obscure.....!


----------



## Merl

CnC Bartok said:


> ...or you're just a decent individual!
> 
> Looking through that list, though, it seems my three favoured "traditional" sets have not yet been considered for the Merl treatment. Strange that, seeing as none of the three are exactly obscure.....!


I only did the ones that Granate didn't cover, CnC. Which are your 3 favourites?


----------



## CnC Bartok

True....
In no particular order:
Jochum/London SO/EMI
Kletzki/Czech PO/Supraphon
Cluytens/Berlin PO/EMI

and Krivine, about whom you were less than complimentary!


----------



## Merl

CnC Bartok said:


> True....
> In no particular order:
> Jochum/London SO/EMI
> Kletzki/Czech PO/Supraphon
> Cluytens/Berlin PO/EMI
> 
> and Krivine, about whom you were less than complimentary!


Hey, CnC, I gave Krivine a B+.Thats a very good cycle in my book. His 7th is a cracker! :lol: I like the Kletzki and Jochum sets a lot too. Cluytens is a good library set for me. How's that for a quick review? Lol. Seriously I'd need to listen to Cluytens again but it's never overly impressed me but it's always been a solid set to recommend. . I know the Kletzki and Jochum sets very well (Kletzki's even numbers get an outing every few months (love that 4th and 8th).


----------



## realdealblues

Interesting to see a revisiting review.

I only differ with my good friend Merl a little.

Vanska I would give a B- or a C+ I would probably go with the latter most days, because I don't feel it really adds anything to the vast catalog of other excellent Beethoven cycles and because I would also rate the Abbado slightly above it which leads me to...

Abbado which I would give a B- because while it was definitely the best of Abbado's cycles, I don't know that it's the upper echelon of "B" graded cycles so a B- feels right.

Bernstein I would give an A- because as Bernstein was an excellent Haydn conductor, his Beethoven 1st is a prime example of that Symphony at it's most glorious. His 2nd is also above average. I will concur that the beginning of the 5th is a little overdoing it and the adagio of the 9th is indeed a bit long in the tooth (although the Vienna Philharmonic sounds glorious), but I wouldn't call the Eroica over-wrought, I think it's a pleasure to hear. The others are all fantastic to me. So the small quibbles of the 5th and 9th make it an A- in my book.

The rest I would agree with.


----------



## Kjetil Heggelund

Michael Gielen is my new hero!!! I'm a bit late I guess...


----------



## jim prideaux

Kjetil Heggelund said:


> Michael Gielen is my new hero!!! I'm a bit late I guess...


Gielen's Beethoven, Mahler and Brahms cycles can be obtained relatively cheaply. I am of a very similar opinion to yourself and in his performances of Beethoven's symphonies I would put him alongside Skrowaczeski and Peter Maag. Obviously arguably a subjective appreciation but it is always nice to read a post on here that reflects one's own perceptions.....


----------



## CnC Bartok

jim prideaux said:


> Gielen's Beethoven, Mahler and Brahms cycles can be obtained relatively cheaply. I am of a very similar opinion to yourself and in his performances of Beethoven's symphonies I would put him alongside Skrowaczeski and Peter Maag. Obviously arguably a subjective appreciation but it is always nice to read a post on here that reflects one's own perceptions.....


Couldn't agree more!

I now have the complete Gielen Edition (SWR Classics) up to and including the Beethoven box, volume 9. There are very few run-of-the-mill performances in there (maybe the Bruckner is better served elsewhere?). His Second Viennese School box is a wonder, and I am eagerly waiting for the final volume - Music post-1945 - to be published.


----------



## Simplicissimus

CnC Bartok said:


> Couldn't agree more!
> 
> I now have the complete Gielen Edition (SWR Classics) up to and including the Beethoven box, volume 9. There are very few run-of-the-mill performances in there (maybe the Bruckner is better served elsewhere?). His Second Viennese School box is a wonder, and I am eagerly waiting for the final volume - Music post-1945 - to be published.


Yeah, Gielen's Schoenberg, Berg, and Webern box is fantastic. I'm a huge Gielen fan (have most of the SWR boxes), so I'd probably love his Beethoven, too. Might have to buy that cycle, though the next Beethoven cycle purchase I've had in mind is Savall's. I'm also inclined to put Stan's recording with Saarbruecken ahead of Gielen, but I need to do some more listening before I decide.


----------



## CnC Bartok

Simplicissimus said:


> Yeah, Gielen's Schoenberg, Berg, and Webern box is fantastic. I'm a huge Gielen fan (have most of the SWR boxes), so I'd probably love his Beethoven, too. Might have to buy that cycle, though the next Beethoven cycle purchase I've had in mind is Savall's. I'm also inclined to put Stan's recording with Saarbruecken ahead of Gielen, but I need to do some more listening before I decide.


For me it's swings and roundabouts comparing Gielen and Stan in Beethoven. Both are top drawer cycles. My next Beethoven cycles are the Bonn set - on order - and de Vriend, which is being re- released in the next few days.....


----------



## leonsm

jim prideaux said:


> Gielen's Beethoven, Mahler and Brahms cycles can be obtained relatively cheaply. I am of a very similar opinion to yourself and in his performances of Beethoven's symphonies I would put him alongside Skrowaczeski and Peter Maag. Obviously arguably a subjective appreciation but it is always nice to read a post on here that reflects one's own perceptions.....


Don't forget his Bruckner cycle, his 8th is outstanding.


----------



## GrosseFugue

So thus far there are five A* cycles. Good to see the standards kept very high. I reckon they are the equivalent of Penguin Rosettes. Merl, I'm curious to know if you'll put up your views on Gunter Wand and the rest of Karajan's cycles (has he done five or six? Can't keep count! Perhaps he needs his very own Pt 18. ).


----------



## Merl

GrosseFugue said:


> So thus far there are five A* cycles. Good to see the standards kept very high. I reckon they are the equivalent of Penguin Rosettes. Merl, I'm curious to know if you'll put up your views on Gunter Wand and the rest of Karajan's cycles (has he done five or six? Can't keep count! Perhaps he needs his very own Pt 18. ).


Ive reviewed Karajan's live Tokyo set and 50s cycle but its true ive never reviewed the 60s, 70s and 80s studio cycles as Granate reviewed 2 of them originally but I should really do them at some time. I did originally plan to do a video for Karajan v Karajan v Karajan but A) I didn't want to appear as a Herbie fanboy B) I'm reluctant to inflict my Manc accent on the world C) I just haven't got the time at the moment. Maybe one for the future. As far as Wand is concerned it's a top cycle but would I lavish it with the sort of praise Hurwitz does? No, but it is class.


----------



## starthrower

The re-released Brilliant Classics Blomstedt Dresden cycle sells for 13 dollars at Presto and Amazon.


----------



## mparta

For something a little different. As I get older a generation that revered Toscanini fades.

I have never heard anything that justifies the fuss, which must say that recordings don't do him justice. Too many great musicians held him in too high esteem for it to be bogus.

So I pulled the set (Cedar, whatever that is) of and started today with a Pastoral that has some lovely moments, but what Pastoral doesn't have lovely moments? I wouldn't return to this. I know it's a prejudice, but I hear an Italian Band Master in the first movement (Bum bum bum bum, Bum bum bum bum) and a tempo that suggests he has somewhere he has to be rather than being somewhere he wants to be. And a patented Toscanini nutty thing later on in the scherzo where he drives the tempo in a way that makes nonsense of the music instead of finding the music and adjusting the tempo accordingly. The orchestra seems good and the recording not bad for 1939 in this remastering.

I once had lunch with Milton Katims, his violist, and expressed my preference for Walter's Mozart. Fighting words, of the caliber of the kinds of things that set off internecine strife related to religious differences and buttering bread on the top or bottom. Hilarious.

So I go on. The rest of this disc is overtures, more symphonies in line.


----------



## Heck148

mparta said:


> View attachment 149259
> 
> 
> For something a little different. As I get older a generation that revered Toscanini fades.
> 
> I have never heard anything that justifies the fuss,


I love Toscanini's Beethoven - he gets right into the drama, the flow, the rhythmic intensity....I don't know the 1939 set too well - I have Eroica, it's good, but not as good as his epic 1949 (the classic "Green cover" lp). that one is absolutely top drawer, amazing drive and intensity, matched by few, maybe Reiner, von Matacic...
AT's '39 Leonore #3 is really sizzling, tho, smoking hot...
#6 "Pastorale is probably the least suited to Toscanini's approach...he was a hard driver, which usually works well with Beethoven...but Pastorale can benefit from a more relaxed approach....Reiner, Walter excel in this wonderful work.


----------



## mparta

Heck148 said:


> I love Toscanini's Beethoven - he gets right into the drama, the flow, the rhythmic intensity....I don't know the 1939 set too well - I have Eroica, it's good, but not as good as his epic 1949 (the classic "Green cover" lp). that one is absolutely top drawer, amazing drive and intensity, matched by few, maybe Reiner, von Matacic...
> AT's '39 Leonore #3 is really sizzling, tho, smoking hot...
> #6 "Pastorale is probably the least suited to Toscanini's approach...he was a hard driver, which usually works well with Beethoven...but Pastorale can benefit from a more relaxed approach....Reiner, Walter excel in this wonderful work.


Alright, I finished one trip through this and liked a couple of things well enough for a repeat, especially the disc with 1, 2 and 8. The second is spectacular, just wonderful. It's the last of the symphonies to which I actually paid much attention for some odd reason, but Toscanini makes a real meal of it in a very nice way. The first and 8th are good. The 3rd and especially the 5th are good. The 7th I like but not as much as others.
The 6th and in particular, the 9th-- just horrors. The 9th is a driven, hectic, angry sounding performance that is just ugly.

There are places throughout the set where I feel him beating the music into submission. It's the lack of that awful feeling that makes the 2nd so wonderful.

So a mixed bag with an interesting and consistent approach that sometimes pays off and sometimes goes badly off the rails. Bad news to so many who held him up as the bee's knees (and the American marketing machine that made money off his deification). I don't buy it.


----------



## Heck148

mparta said:


> ....
> So a mixed bag with an interesting and consistent approach that sometimes pays off and sometimes goes badly off the rails. Bad news to so many who held him up as the bee's knees (and the American marketing machine that made money off his deification). I don't buy it.


same could be said for a lot of other conductors- certainly Furtwangler, Karajan, Celibidache to name just a few....what works for some doesn't work for others...."one man's trash is another man's treasure" and all that....


----------



## SixFootScowl

Not a complaint. Just an observation. My two favorite cycles are not in the list: Schuricht and Monteux. Monteux is a hybrid of VPO/LSO, but Schuricht is all one orchestra, Orchestre de la Société des Concerts du Conservatoire Paris.


----------



## Heck148

SixFootScowl said:


> ...... Monteux is a hybrid of VPO/LSO,.....


Monteux cycle is excellent!! very fine...one of my favorites..


----------



## mparta

SixFootScowl said:


> Not a complaint. Just an observation. My two favorite cycles are not in the list: Schuricht and Monteux. Monteux is a hybrid of VPO/LSO, but Schuricht is all one orchestra, Orchestre de la Société des Concerts du Conservatoire Paris.


I've been a little inappropriately biased about that French orchestra, but I think Schuricht, whose Bruckner is very fine, might make them sit up and play.

I just got the Monteux, haven't heard any of that for .... well, we'll just leave that, I had the LP of the 1st and 8th (I think) when I was a kid.

For all my kvetching about Toscanini I'm hooked on the performances that I like. When I said the 2nd was superb I mean that is is superb. First also very good, I'm going to go back through this set in order (avoiding the 6th and 9th, no hope).


----------



## mparta

Heck148 said:


> same could be said for a lot of other conductors- certainly Furtwangler, Karajan, Celibidache to name just a few....what works for some doesn't work for others...."one man's trash is another man's treasure" and all that....


I think that some (the things in his reputation to which I object) of it comes from Toscanini himself but also from the marketing/press machine, whereby his interpretations are not just a thing, but the thing, many claims for "objectivity" without the intrusion of the performer, which is nonsense. In the good performances I hear Beethoven and Toscanini still but am grateful for both. In the bad performances, just Toscanini. It's a stage in the 20th century evolution of performance practice, along with the HIP-silliness. Interesting article in the New York Times this week about the big Karl Richter box, puts some perspective into his role in Bach performance but doesn't do justice to how difficult it must have been to be a musician (and a human being) through that period.


----------



## Merl

SixFootScowl said:


> Not a complaint. Just an observation. My two favorite cycles are not in the list: Schuricht and Monteux. Monteux is a hybrid of VPO/LSO, but Schuricht is all one orchestra, Orchestre de la Société des Concerts du Conservatoire Paris.


What list?.........


----------



## SixFootScowl

Merl said:


> What list?.........


Good question. The list in post #2.


----------



## gvn

SixFootScowl said:


> Not a complaint. Just an observation. My two favorite cycles are not in the list: Schuricht and Monteux. Monteux is a hybrid of VPO/LSO, but Schuricht is all one orchestra, Orchestre de la Société des Concerts du Conservatoire Paris.


The great strength of Merl's survey is that it describes in detail acres & acres of (mainly) recent Beethoven cycles that have not received such thorough attention elsewhere (and appraises them all _with the same pair of ears_). Merl deliberately didn't include most of the classic sets that had already been well covered on TC (and elsewhere). This also applies to Toscanini, Furtwängler, Walter, etc., etc.

I must say Monteux's Beethoven has been a great lifeline in our household during the last 6 months, when we've suffered a series of catastrophes one after another. All the brilliant high-tension high-voltage high-stress struggle-&-doubt Beethoven conductors (Toscanini, Furtwängler, Bernstein, Karajan, the Kleibers, etc., etc., etc.) have felt uncomfortably close to home. It's been a pleasure to hear a voice of a different kind.

I remember once seeing on television, maybe 50 years ago, Peter Ustinov ask Stokowski whether the opening of Beethoven's Fifth should be played da-da-da-DAH↓ (fist pressed crushingly downward) or da-da-da-DAH↑ (fist brandished triumphantly upward). Monteux is almost the epitome of the latter approach. Do we hear Fate knocking at the door? Then let him be welcomed! Monteux sides with Alexander Pope and Handel: in the final analysis, he says, "whatever _is,_ is right!" Here, you feel, is a conductor who would go on conducting just the same even if there was a total riot in the audience.

There's a live Paris performance of the Fifth where Monteux seems to play the first movement almost as if it's the Marseillaise.

Haven't heard Schuricht for a long time; too long. Must revisit him.


----------



## SixFootScowl

gvn said:


> The great strength of Merl's survey is that it describes in detail acres & acres of (mainly) recent Beethoven cycles that have not received such thorough attention elsewhere (and appraises them all _with the same pair of ears_). Merl deliberately didn't include most of the classic sets that had already been well covered on TC (and elsewhere). This also applies to Toscanini, Furtwängler, Walter, etc., etc.
> 
> I must say Monteux's Beethoven has been a great lifeline in our household during the last 6 months, when we've suffered a series of catastrophes one after another. All the brilliant high-tension high-voltage high-stress struggle-&-doubt Beethoven conductors (Toscanini, Furtwängler, Bernstein, Karajan, the Kleibers, etc., etc., etc.) have felt uncomfortably close to home. It's been a pleasure to hear a voice of a different kind.
> 
> I remember once seeing on television, maybe 50 years ago, Peter Ustinov ask Stokowski whether the opening of Beethoven's Fifth should be played da-da-da-DAH↓ (fist pressed crushingly downward) or da-da-da-DAH↑ (fist brandished triumphantly upward). Monteux is almost the epitome of the latter approach. Do we hear Fate knocking at the door? Then let him be welcomed! Monteux sides with Alexander Pope and Handel: in the final analysis, he says, "whatever _is,_ is right!" Here, you feel, is a conductor who would go on conducting just the same even if there was a total riot in the audience.
> 
> There's a live Paris performance of the Fifth where Monteux seems to play the first movement almost as if it's the Marseillaise.
> 
> Haven't heard Schuricht for a long time; too long. Must revisit him.


Thanks for the detailed and informative reply. I have a lot of Monteux Beethoven symphonies besides the VPO/LSO set. My only french one is a Ninth.

Schuricht also has a very nice Beethoven Missa Solemnis. I actually stumbled across Schuricht quite accidentally when I was hunting down Monteux recordings and found one cheap online with no image, so I was not sure what I was getting but the title included Missa Solemnis and Monteux. Come to find out it was Schuricht at Montreux, France, not Pierre Monteux. :lol:


----------



## gvn

SixFootScowl said:


> I have a lot of Monteux Beethoven symphonies besides the VPO/LSO set.


Do you have any favorites among them, or any that (without necessarily being "better" than the VPO/LSO ones) are distinctively different in some way? Apart from live performances, I've also been wondering about his early San Francisco RCA Fourth + Eighth.



SixFootScowl said:


> It was Schuricht at Montreux, France, not Pierre Monteux. :lol:


I wonder if Monteux ever performed at Montreux, and if so, how the organizers coped with the spelling chaos.


----------



## Heck148

gvn said:


> Do you have any favorites among them, or any that (without necessarily being "better" than the VPO/LSO ones) are distinctively different in some ways.


Monteux's LSO #s 2,4,and 7 are really excellent..I like the 9th, too.


----------



## SixFootScowl

gvn said:


> Do you have any favorites among them, or any that (without necessarily being "better" than the VPO/LSO ones) are distinctively different in some way? Apart from live performances, I've also been wondering about his early San Francisco RCA Fourth + Eighth.


I have the CD with San Francisco 4th and 8th. It is a good set. I can't really say how much it differs from others because I have not listened to it enough or done any comparison with the others. I actually have the following:

Boston 2,3,4,5,6 & 9 (4 still in the mail)

NDR 2 & 4

NBC 7th

Los Angeles 8th

France 9th

San Francisco 4 & 8 (which is part of a larger set, not all Beethoven, but can be found separate)

Royal Philharmonic BBC 3rd

Concertgebouworkest 3rd (which came as bonus in the latest VPO/LSO release)

Got a little carried away, you might say, but it was fun, and all good listening.

With Monteux, I would expect the variations between between these to be primarily due to the orchestras, the hall it was recorded in, and the recording quality.


----------



## gvn

Thanks, that's very helpful. I'm glad the beautiful lone Concertgebouw Third is now being included in the LSO/VPO box. That's the sort of sensible coupling that record companies don't often think of doing!



SixFootScowl said:


> With Monteux, I would expect the variations between between these to be primarily due to the orchestras, the hall it was recorded in, and the recording quality.


Yes, I suspect conductors who get substantial early experience accompanying ballet tend to vary less than most other conductors. In ballet it's vital to keep the tempo of each number exactly the same from performance to performance, and even from season to season! I suspect that early habit tends to stay with them for life.

But when I particularly like a conductor's handling of a standard work, and I'm going to be playing it _very_ often, I find it helpful to have multiple recordings of it _even if those recordings don't vary greatly_. It keeps my listening fresh. I don't always expect the violins to come in at _exactly_ the same volume at letter C (or whatever).


----------



## SixFootScowl

gvn said:


> But when I particularly like a conductor's handling of a standard work, and I'm going to be playing it _very_ often, I find it helpful to have multiple recordings of it _even if those recordings don't vary greatly_. It keeps my listening fresh. I don't always expect the violins to come in at _exactly_ the same volume at letter C (or whatever).


I feel similar though I don't know how much I realize the variations, but even so, the variations will keep things fresher overall, even if on a subconscious level, because my listening is more while doing other things. I realy don't get much time for dedicated listening and when I do I usually turn to Opera on DVD.

I just read some liner notes that Monteux was not into "interpretations" just played the music. That is why I figured he would not vary much, but your note about conducting ballet at an early age is interesting. So there may be several factors going into his consistency.

The other thing I like about Monteux and Schuricht is that both kept good tempos. I don't care for my Beethoven too slow. Yet too fast can be a problem. Zinman goes so fast that the Turkish March in the Ninth sounds like the Turkish Run.

One thing that I wish were not so, there is only one recording of Beethoven's first symphony by Monteux. Well, at least we have that one!


----------



## Merl

Thanks for your reply to SixFootScowl, gvn. I couldnt have put it any better. As I've said previously, one day I may go back and review all those other sets that Granate reviewed or at least give them some kind of mini review and a rating. I don't know if I can be bothered, though. As far as Schuricht is concerned that's my favourite mono cycle, SixFootScowl. Always has been a lovely cycle. I'd have to play the Monteux again. Not played it in at least 6 years.


----------



## mparta

Merl said:


> Thanks for your reply to SixFootScowl, gvn. I couldnt have put it any better. As I've said previously, one day I may go back and review all those other sets that Granate reviewed or at least give them some kind of mini review and a rating. I don't know if I can be bothered, though. As far as Schuricht is concerned that's my favourite mono cycle, SixFootScowl. Always has been a lovely cycle. I'd have to play the Monteux again. Not played it in at least 6 years.


The Monteux set is a recent acquisition. I had whatever LP had his 8th when I was a kid, I remember, and nothing about it.

In general, the cycle with different orchestras is very fine, a nice listen through the first time. With the exception of..
The 9th, which is a disaster. The orchestra is not up to it, the chorus is very amateurish. Just not something I would hear again, I wonder why.
There was a review of Giulini playing the 9th years ago, the review by Andrew Porter in the New Yorker I guess, that's the only place where I would have read him although I'm sure he columned in British papers. He thought that Giulini wasn't a 9th conductor yet, which seemed pretty arrogant (and characteristic) but it seems to require a bit of something extra. It's not my favorite by a mile, so I don't regard it as a touchstone. 
The Monteux set is a good acquisition, I will listen up to the last disc again. By the way, Vickers is the tenor. Really predictable the way he rolls up to the difficult tenor ascent.


----------



## SixFootScowl

mparta said:


> The Monteux set is a recent acquisition. I had whatever LP had his 8th when I was a kid, I remember, and nothing about it.
> 
> In general, the cycle with different orchestras is very fine, a nice listen through the first time. With the exception of..
> The 9th, which is a disaster. The orchestra is not up to it, the chorus is very amateurish. Just not something I would hear again, I wonder why.
> There was a review of Giulini playing the 9th years ago, the review by Andrew Porter in the New Yorker I guess, that's the only place where I would have read him although I'm sure he columned in British papers. He thought that Giulini wasn't a 9th conductor yet, which seemed pretty arrogant (and characteristic) but it seems to require a bit of something extra. It's not my favorite by a mile, so I don't regard it as a touchstone.
> The Monteux set is a good acquisition, I will listen up to the last disc again. By the way, Vickers is the tenor. Really predictable the way he rolls up to the difficult tenor ascent.


 Monteux has two other recorded Ninths. One with a French orchestra and one I think is with the Boston orchesta.


----------



## Sondersdorf

starthrower said:


> The re-released Brilliant Classics Blomstedt Dresden cycle sells for 13 dollars at Presto and Amazon.


We live in wondrous times. (As long as your world consists entirely of buying classical music.) On a whim, I surveyed Beethoven Symphony No. 7 recordings last evening and picked Blomstedt Dresden as my favorite. The complete cycle on Qobuz as a CD-quality download? 8.09 €. Truly wondrous.


----------



## Enthusiast

> Vanska
> I'd written this one off years ago probably due to the sound but I now have it in much better quality and it is indeed a very fine, traditional cycle in excellent sound. There's no duds in the set and some corkers (that 8th is excellent). So after years of giving this a harder time (I was never too hard on it) I can happily recommend it. By the way, if any critic ever says this is one of the brisker sets out there they are talking pish (I've read two reviews which say that). It's not.
> 
> Grade: B+


I've always liked much of the Vanska set and bought the records as they came out. They seemed very fresh and I certainly would never have described them as "traditional". I went with the widespread critical view of the time that they seemed to represent a sort of post-HIP Beethoven - a way out of what was coming to seem a HIP orthodoxy. After that I think HIP Beethoven found new life and Vanska's very cerebral way with Ludwig no longer seems a way forward so much as statements of his own Beethoven aesthetic - very distinctive - just as Harnoncourt's and Klemperer's sets are. As such it remains one of the corner stones of my collection of Beethoven sets - but (largely thanks to Merl's guidance) I do now have a large number of favourite sets (most but not all of them graded by Merl as "A"s).


----------



## Merl

Enthusiast said:


> .... it remains one of the corner stones of my collection of Beethoven sets - but (largely thanks to Merl's guidance) I do now have a large number of favourite sets (most but not all of them graded by Merl as "A"s).


As long as you enjoy them, Enthusiast, that's all that matters.


----------



## Enthusiast

^ Yes. And no - enjoyment is not the first word I would use for those recordings! I do enjoy them, of course, but they impress me more than delight me if you see what I mean.


----------

