# Johannes Brahms - The symphonies



## Daniel

The shadow of Beethoven followed Brahms quite a long time, but finally he could finish his 1st symphony. It is obvious, that he often needed many years to get to an end with first works of an instrumental group: In the piano sonatas, other chambermusic like the piano quintet, piano concertos, symphonies...

In total he wrote 4 symphonies: c-minor, D-major, F-major and e-minor. Every one with a special touch and gestus: the 1st one very extrovert with great impetus, the 2nd one more introvert and intimate, "pastoral", the 3rd one full of emotions, melodical richness and sudden changes of feelings, a very strong work, and then the sighing, melodical reduced 4th, which covers old with new: Old forms like the Passacaglia in the 4th movement in the context of romantical harmonic and so on...

Do you see a significant musical development from symphony to symphony?

What are your favourite perfomances and recordings?

Greetings,
Daniel


----------



## Frasier

Agreed, Brahms wrote some pleasant music - he was perfectly competent - but he was no innovator. Excuse me saying this but where Beethoven really pushed the symphony and sonata forward by miles, Brahms stuck to Beethoven's old formula. So yes, Brahms was a genius at the well-trodden route but he didn't have Beethoven's creativity.


----------



## ChamberNut

Arguably, the greatest set of symphonies written post-Beethoven.

I absolutely love Brahms' orchestration. It is a shame he did not write (or rather publish) more orchestral works. They are pretty much all masterpieces, in my opinion.

I think his 4 symphonies stand up to anyone other composers' best 4 symphonies, perhaps Beethoven the lone exception.


----------



## Kurkikohtaus

Daniel said:


> In total he wrote 4 symphonies ... Every one with a special touch and gestus ... Do you see a significant musical development from symphony to symphony?


While I respect your subjective reactions and feelings to each of his symphonies, I think the similarities betwee them far outweigh these differences you list. Analytically speaking, they are all written in the same style, with attention to motivic counterpunctal accompaniment of themes, broad structures governed by a strict harmonic plan with a focus on the Neapolitan of the Dominant (flat VI), and the alternation of massive _Tutti_ textures and fragile _Chamber_ textures. These are Brahms' hallmarks, and the Symphonies represent his mastery of them at the height of his powers.

So I am not _criticizing_ Brahms in saying that his symphonies do not show development from one to the other, I am saying that they are the ultimate representation of a finished master.


----------



## david johnson

i enjoy -

hvk/bpo #1
kertesz also does a good first.

dj


----------



## Daniel

Hello Kurkikohtaus!



Kurkikohtaus said:


> Analytically speaking, they are all written in the same style, with attention to motivic counterpunctal accompaniment of themes, broad structures governed by a strict harmonic plan with a focus on the Neapolitan of the Dominant (flat VI), and the alternation of massive _Tutti_ textures and fragile _Chamber_ textures. These are Brahms' hallmarks, and the Symphonies represent his mastery of them at the height of his powers.


Agreed.

But maybe we can see a subtile development in the main-direction of every symphony. Let me explain:

1st symphony, typical way "per aspera ad astra", same tonality as Beethoven 5th, c-minor. 4th movement works with material from the 9th, and has an ending in extraordinery C-major (same way as the 5th). The way from minor to major

2nd symphony: It is a symphony in major. Interesting: The first movement somehow searches for minor, which is actually reached in the f-sharp-minor-theme in the exposition. The movement ends with a not unknown, but significant ending I--> minor IV - I. D-major points to g-minor... One could say, this major symphony has a tendence to minor...

3rd symphony now goes another way: Changing much between major and minor. Formal interesting with 3 themes, F-major, C-major and A-major. After the two opening bars we can follow an expanded cadence with neapolitans and dominants with steps in minor and major. In the coda of the 4th movement we can hear the merged major/minor, almost "blue-note": an almost simultanous playing minor/major-event in lightest colours, even a bit impressionisic. So maybe this symphony searches for a combination between major and minor.

The 4th symphony is somehow different, the ways of major-minor are not a main topic any longer, this symphony is a result of the three. More backwards in the idiom than the others in my eyes, but charming.

But yes, you are right, counterpunctual and in harmonies Brahms does not open new dimensions like Liszt or Wagner in single works.
What do you think about Bruckner in this matter? He has his predeterminated harmonical language since his 1st symphony, he only increases harmonies like in the 9th, which sound not understandable in the functions, but they are well-grounded in the system of Sechter and even Riemann.

Daniel


----------



## Guest

I am no expert on classical music and cannot contribute much to this intelligent conversation but i will say a little.

Agreed- he was not much of an innovator, he openly expressed that he did not like the new style German of other composers such as Wagner. But he still mastered a form of music pioneered by Beethoven, and who is to say that to be great you have to innovate. 

Agreed- he wrote 4 very good symphonies which is put together with the up most precision and attention to detail and are delightful works.

And finally that which i know is going to make many cringe, I think it lacks true passion. The only movement of his 4 symphonies that actually "capture me" is the 3rd movement of his 3rd Symphony. I wouldn’t have all four of his symphonies in my car right now if it were not for that movement. I keep listening through the rest listening for maybe something i overlooked with that kind of beauty but i can't seem to find it. I am not taking away to his genius but it almost at times seems as if the symphonies were overwritten at times. Now this is just an opinion which i already know is not shared by many.


----------



## Rondo

I would, as many recommend the First and Fourth. The chorale in the last mv't of the first never gets old! Personally, it's a very nostalgic theme. Also, the finale to the Fourth is great. I honestly cant understand how anyone could sense any lack of passion in those two movements. But, yet, we all listen from different angles and experiences, so it can vary. 

As for recordings, the ones I have are Walter/Columbia SO for the First and Bernstein/Vienna for the Fourth. Although, for Brahms, you can never go wrong with either of these conductors for any work.


----------



## opus67

Notserp89m said:


> The only movement of his 4 symphonies that actually "capture me" is the 3rd movement of his 3rd Symphony.


Ditto.


----------



## Kurkikohtaus

Daniel said:


> What do you think about Bruckner in this matter? He has his predeterminated harmonical language since his 1st symphony...


Bruckner certainly knew his harmony... but there is a problem with the harmonic depth into which he dwelves vis-a-vis the architecture that he creates across the breadth of a movement.

His approach to modulation is clearly that of an excellent organist and improvisor... but because we already have "every key" in the exposition, the development then does not create a wholly contrasting plane _harmonically_. Although in the development, his themes become fragmented and superimposed on each other (as one would expect), it doesn't have a different _harmonic sound world_ than the _long, long, long_ exposition that we just heard... the return then to the recapitulation and home-key isn't always as satisfying as in Beethoven and Brahms, and the restatement of all the themes in the recapitulation often leaves one wondering if we have indeed "come home".

This is where Brahms (after Beethoven) excells... his harmonic language _creates_ the architecture and gives us a _feel_ for where we are in the movement.


----------



## Edward Elgar

This may sound daft, but I like to think of his symphonies as the four seasons, the first being spring and the last being winter. The idea came to me when I realised how autumnal the 3rd sounds. True it is a very powerful work, but the 3rd movement in particular suggests tiredness and the slow recession of nature. What do you think?


----------



## World Violist

Karajan's recording of the first is amazing.


----------



## shsherm

Brahms was a complete perfectionist and destroyed many of his works because he thought they were inadequate. He did follow the example of Beethoven in some ways but he wove complex melodies with inverted passages and as many as six continuous themes in one passage-2nd movement 2nd Symphony. He opens the 2nd with four notes as did Beethoven in the 5th and Mahler also opens his 5th with a four note passage- the funeral march by the trumpet. There is an evolution in successive composers and they were definitely influenced by their predecessors.


----------



## Kevin Acker

I have more recordings of Brahms cycles/symphonies than I can count. Favorite cycle is Abbado. Favorite individual recording would be Kleiber's 4th.


----------



## BAWIG05

Kevin Acker said:


> I have more recordings of Brahms cycles/symphonies than I can count. Favorite cycle is Abbado. Favorite individual recording would be Kleiber's 4th.


Agreed, agreed.

Kleiber's Fourth (with the Vienna Philharmonic on DG) is a favorite, but let's look closely at each symphony, as far as recordings go.

No. 1: Klemperer's 1st is quite good. Toscanini does well too. I don't know as much about this symphony as I would like, so other recommendations are Karajan and Abbado.

No. 2: For sheer beauty, Karajan is gorgeous. I have both Bruno Walter recordings on LP (New York and Columbia), and they are both very special and feature terrific finales. Abbado has recorded the piece twice and both and well played and recorded. Klemperer is still regarded as revelatory in some circles, and is also outstanding.

No. 3: Karajan again gets the Berliners to play with tremendous beauty, while Walter and Toscanini remain prime recomendations here as well. Alsop's 3rd is supposed to be the best of that Naxos cycle, and once again, I like Abbado here.

No. 4: Karajan isn't as prime a contender here, so that leves the others. Of them, Kleiber's may be the most famous, and Klemperer the most contrversial. Haitnink on Phillips is beautiful, but Abbado brings more insight to the music.

Haydn Variations: Bonus! I love these, and I hope no one will mind two more cents from me. Karl Bohm's with the Vienna Philharmonic never fail to impress me, and Claudio Abbado's simply sound terrific. Adrian Boult of all people is a sleeper on EMI.


----------



## World Violist

Ten cents still won't get me a candy bar...

Anyway, I've not been listening to Brahms too much lately, though from time to time I think of the First symphony. It's probably my favorite of the three that I've actually listened to all the way through (the exception being the Third - never captivated me). That symphony was revelatory to me, though I can't stand the screeching violins... I'll just have to find a better-balanced recording (Karajan's '80s recording, I think, is mine, and the violins really do screech...).

I like the German Requiem, too, but that isn't really a symphony...


----------



## opus67

Give the fourth another try. It's one of Brahms' most Romantic works, IMHO. I love the final movement; I still don't get what they mean by the chaconne/pasacaglia in that one, but I hope to do so soon.


----------



## World Violist

opus67 said:


> Give the fourth another try. It's one of Brahms' most Romantic works, IMHO. I love the final movement; I still don't get what they mean by the chaconne/pasacaglia in that one, but I hope to do so soon.


The fourth is my second favorite of the cycle... I agree, it's a really good piece; the first movement is downright thrilling at the buildup to the climax.

The fourth movement chaconne/passacaglia is basically when Brahms builds the entire movement around the chord progression the brass section (at the beginning)...


----------



## David C Coleman

ChamberNut said:


> Arguably, the greatest set of symphonies written post-Beethoven.


Don't you rate Bruckner, Mahler, Sibelius, Shostakovitch maybe!???...


----------



## kiwipolish

Arguably = Open to argument


----------



## David C Coleman

kiwipolish said:


> Arguably = Open to argument


Thanks for the English lesson!!! I was just trying to see the members' stance on the other composers...


----------



## AlanB

Love all the Brahms symphonies. If you like your music with plenty of schmaltz then Bernstein's set takes some beating.
Another favourite set is Gunter Wand.
PS....If the violins screech may I respectfully point to the equipment one listens on. :kiss:


----------



## superhorn

Fraster, you should read Schoenberg's eye-opening essay "Brahms the Progressive ." Yes, Brahms was certainly strongly influenced by the symphonies of Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven when he wrote his , but they are still vastly different from those of his illustrious predecessors . 
The tricky rhythmic quirks of Brahms alone are quite innovative , such as his way of making you confuse where the downbeats and upbeats are constantly .


----------



## Rhinotop

Brahms is one of my favorite composers. Regardless of whether his music had memorable melodies, brilliant orchestration or was an innovator of harmony, etc., Brahms wrote a music with great and elaborate craftsmanship, his chamber music is one of the best examples (he is one of the greatest exponents, no doubt). He never bothered to write avant-garde music, but to innovate and consolidate within established forms (sonata, variations, vocal and choral music, etc.), he wanted a great consolidation of all that music and he wanted it not to be forgotten.


----------



## Marsilius

I seem to be in a minority in enjoying the second most of all. The live Beecham performance (from the Edinburgh Festival, I seem to recall) is tremendous.


----------



## Mal

I like Walter's set with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Favorites(individual symphonies):

No.1--Klemperer/Philharmonia, Van Beinum/Concertgebouw(stereo version from '58), Walter/NY Philharmonic and Columbia Symphony

No.2--Kertesz/London Symphony on BBC Legends, Kertesz/Vienna Philharmonic, Klemperer/Philharmonia, Jochum/Berlin Philharmonic, Walter NY Phil and Columbia Symphony

No.3--Kempe/BerlinPhilharmonic, Kertesz/Vienna Phil., Jochum/Berlin Phil., Klemperer/Philharmonia, Tennstedt/London Philharmonic

No.4--Walter/Columbia Symphony, Kertesz/Vienna Phil., Klemperer/Philharmonia, Van Beinum/Concertgebouw 

Complete sets: Klemperer/Philharmonia, Kertesz/Vienna Philharmonic, Jochum/Berlin Philharmonic on DG Originals, Walter/Columbia Symphony


----------



## damianjb1

I'm just starting to work my way through the Symphonies. I love love love the Piano Concerto's and the Requiem. The James Levine set was recommended by people on this site and as I was able to pick it up cheap I bought it. I have Furtwangler recordings of all of them in a big box set I have.


----------



## starthrower

I bought this 5 disc set from importcds for the ridiculous price of 8 dollars. Contains the 4 symphonies, 2 piano concertos, violin, and double concertos, variations, and overtures. All performed by famous soloists and world class orchestras. http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=225384










http://www.importcds.com/ultimate-brahms-various-artists/028947817406


----------



## Heck148

My own list:

#1 - Solti/CSO, Wand/CSO is really fine also; Toscanini/NBC
#2 - Monteux/LSO, Reiner/NYPO, Bernstein/NYPO is good also
#3 - Reiner/CSO, Levine/CSO, Szell/Cleveland
#4 - Toscanini/NBC, Reiner/RoyalPO


----------



## Heck148

opus67 said:


> Give the fourth another try. It's one of Brahms' most Romantic works, IMHO. I love the final movement; I still don't get what they mean by the chaconne/pasacaglia in that one, but I hope to do so soon.


A chaconne, or passacaglia, is a series of variations over a ground bass. Brahms 4/IV is such a work - IIRC 34 variations played consecutively with few breaks. the First 8 measures sets the bass line/harmonic sequence. each 8 measures after that is a new variation. as you listen, you will begin to hear the repeated bass pattern, even tho that may vary in rhythm and melody.


----------



## Vaneyes

Nos. 1,2,3,4, BPO/HvK (DG, rec.1963/4).

1, 2, 3, of Philharmonia/Klemps (EMI). 2 & 3 of Columbia SO/Walter (Sony). 2 of BPO/Harnoncourt (Teldec).


PEE-ESS: It's nice to see some TCers digging up old threads with the same subject, rather than repeating. :tiphat:


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Heck148 said:


> My own list:
> 
> #1 - Solti/CSO, Wand/CSO is really fine also; Toscanini/NBC
> #2 - Monteux/LSO, Reiner/NYPO, Bernstein/NYPO is good also
> #3 - Reiner/CSO, Levine/CSO, Szell/Cleveland
> #4 - Toscanini/NBC, Reiner/RoyalPO


A Brahms 2 with Reiner and the New York Philharmonic? I think you may have meant to say Walter with NY Philharmonic.


----------



## Heck148

Haydn67 said:


> A Brahms 2 with Reiner and the New York Philharmonic? I think you may have meant to say Walter with NY Philharmonic.


No, it's Reiner/NYPO, a live recording from 3/60....really rousing performance, very powerful and exciting...


----------



## Pugg

> Nos. 1,2,3,4, BPO/HvK (DG, rec.1963/4).


I second Vaneyes.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Heck148 said:


> No, it's Reiner/NYPO, a live recording from 3/60....really rousing performance, very powerful and exciting...


Well, that certainly sounds interesting. I'll have to look for it. Thanks very much, Heck.

...I can't seem to find it on Amazon. Is it available on a set...or an original LP?


----------



## Heck148

I got it on an Arlecchino CD, ARL 131, probably now OOP.
I thought I saw it included on one of the NYPO sets - check the NYPO website/store.

It's a great performance, really rousing, audience must have gone nuts.


----------



## Pugg

Vaneyes said:


> Nos. 1,2,3,4, BPO/HvK (DG, rec.1963/4).
> 
> 1, 2, 3, of Philharmonia/Klemps (EMI). 2 & 3 of Columbia SO/Walter (Sony). 2 of BPO/Harnoncourt (Teldec).
> 
> PEE-ESS: It's nice to see some TCers digging up old threads with the same subject, rather than repeating. :tiphat:


I did listen to no 4 this afternoon, still trilling recording.


----------



## Lenny

I have a strange relationship to Brahms symphonies. They are almost too perfect to listen to, I try to spare them.. for... what? I don't know, but rarely listen to them. Everything else from Brahms - I'm a heavy user. String quartets, quintets, sextets.. Concertos, piano sonatas, basically everything the man touches is perfection. I'm starting to be quite confident in saying he's my favourite composer.


----------



## Bettina

Lenny said:


> I have a strange relationship to Brahms symphonies. They are almost too perfect to listen to, I try to spare them.. for... what? I don't know, but rarely listen to them. Everything else from Brahms - I'm a heavy user. String quartets, quintets, sextets.. Concertos, piano sonatas, basically everything the man touches is perfection. I'm starting to be quite confident in saying he's my favourite composer.


I know what you mean about the perfection. I love Brahms symphonies. But they don't always move me emotionally. The craftsmanship is so incredibly good, and sometimes I become absorbed in admiring that aspect of the work.

Especially when Brahms develops a motive in an interesting way or weaves together various rhythmic patterns, I start thinking "wow, what he just did there was so clever and skillful." That thought sometimes prevents me from fully engaging with his music on an emotional level. I need to try listening to Brahms with my analytical skills turned down and my heartstrings turned on!


----------



## Lenny

Bettina said:


> I know what you mean about the perfection. I love Brahms symphonies. But they don't always move me emotionally. The craftsmanship is so incredibly good, and sometimes I become absorbed in admiring that aspect of the work.
> 
> Especially when Brahms develops a motive in an interesting way or weaves together various rhythmic patterns, I start thinking "wow, what he just did there was so clever and skillful." That thought sometimes prevents me from fully engaging with his music on an emotional level. I need to try listening to Brahms with my analytical skills turned down and my heartstrings turned on!


But it's not wrong to enjoy music purely intellectually, "wow-listening"! Some Brahms works are to me also so moving that something breaks through all the technical wonders... Like the very 1st piano sonata (and many other chamber works). But yeah, I kinda share your thoughts about the symphonies. Subtle, technical, very carefully crafted.. That's already enough to listen to!


----------



## hpowders

Bettina said:


> I know what you mean about the perfection. I love Brahms symphonies. But they don't always move me emotionally. The craftsmanship is so incredibly good, and sometimes I become absorbed in admiring that aspect of the work.
> 
> Especially when Brahms develops a motive in an interesting way or weaves together various rhythmic patterns, I start thinking "wow, what he just did there was so clever and skillful." That thought sometimes prevents me from fully engaging with his music on an emotional level. I need to try listening to Brahms with my analytical skills turned down and my heartstrings turned on!


Same with me. I would take Beethoven's Pastorale over any of the 4 Brahms' Symphonies.


----------



## hpowders

The Brahms' symphony that moves me the most is the Fourth.
The second movement makes me feel like I am on a ferry between islands in Denmark; nothing but fog. Mysterious.
The fourth movement is cataclysmic and foreshadows impending doom. One of the greatest theme and variation movements ever composed.


----------



## Bettina

Lenny said:


> But it's not wrong to enjoy music purely intellectually, "wow-listening"! Some Brahms works are to me also so moving that something breaks through all the technical wonders... Like the very 1st piano sonata (and many other chamber works). But yeah, I kinda share your thoughts about the symphonies. Subtle, technical, very carefully crafted.. That's already enough to listen to!


I love that term "wow-listening." I'm totally going to steal that! Many works by Brahms seem to invite "wow-listening." But yes, I agree with you about the first piano sonata--many passionate moments and thundering chords!

I feel like there probably are emotional depths lurking in his symphonies as well. But it's harder for me to notice them because of the intellectual stimulation provided by his symphonic craftsmanship.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Lenny said:


> I'm starting to be quite confident in saying he's my favourite composer.


Nice to hear. Number one for me too:tiphat:


----------



## Pugg

Haydn67 said:


> Nice to hear. Number one for me too:tiphat:


I put it milder, high in my top 10.


----------



## Animal the Drummer

Haydn67 said:


> Nice to hear. Number one for me too:tiphat:


In that case how come your username?


----------



## Bettina

Animal the Drummer said:


> In that case how come your username?


Haha, good question! Looking forward to his answer. Maybe his username is a tribute to the Brahms Variations on a Theme of Haydn...


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Bettina said:


> Haha, good question! Looking forward to his answer. Maybe his username is a tribute to the Brahms Variations on a Theme of Haydn...


Well, half of my answer is I have used Brahms in a fair number of instances elsewhere. It was time to give someone else a chance. The other half is at the time I joined this site about two months ago, I was was on a BIG Haydn kick, especially at having recently discovered the wonderful world of his Piano Trios, as performed by The Beaux Arts Trio.:tiphat:


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Pugg said:


> I put it milder, high in my top 10.


I can't help it, I've got to wink back...


----------



## AlanB

Haydn67 said:


> Nice to hear. Number one for me too:tiphat:


Add me to the list. I was weaned on Brahms some 70+ years ago and never the love has dimmed. Over the years other composers have tried to knock him off the pedestal i.e. Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann and Richard Strauss (of late) but dear Johannes always shines through.
Favourite symphony set? Bernstein with the VPO....Pure schmaltz. :kiss:


----------



## Chronochromie

I'll take the 4th (Kleiber/VPO), can do without the rest at present.


----------



## Animal the Drummer

No.3 for me, preferably with Klemperer and the Philharmonia on top form. Second choice no.1, in the monumental 1964 recording from Karajan and the BPO. I like the even-numbered symphonies as well but they speak less immediately to me.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Animal the Drummer said:


> No.3 for me, preferably with Klemperer and the Philharmonia on top form. Second choice no.1, in the monumental 1964 recording from Karajan and the BPO. I like the even-numbered symphonies as well but they speak less immediately to me.


Klemperer is solid all the way around for the Brahms Symphonies, especially in the First for me. The Third is also my favorite, with my top choice here being Rudolf Kempe's reading with the Berlin Philharmonic. Istvan Kertesz's Brahms Second with the London Symphony on BBC Legends is the finest B2 I have ever heard. As for the Fourth, after all these years, Bruno Walter's Columbia Symphony version is still my sentimental favorite.


----------



## PeterF

Sets of the 4 Brahms symphonies:
Walter / Columbia Symphony Orchestra
Klemperer / Philharmonia Orchestra
Jochum / London Philharmonic Orchestra

I consider all three sets very good. also like 

Symphony No.1 - Giulini / Los Angeles Philharmonic Orchestra and Alsop / London Philharmonic Orchestra
Symphony No.2 - Monteux / London Philharmonic Orchestra and Giulini / Los Angeles Philharmonic Orchestra,and
Bernstein / NY Philharmonic
Symphony No.3 - Haitink / London Symphony Orchestra and Bernstein / New York Philharmonic
Symphony No.4 - Kleiber / Vienna Philharmonic and Haitink / London Symphony Orchestra


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

PeterF said:


> Sets of the 4 Brahms symphonies:
> Walter / Columbia Symphony Orchestra
> Klemperer / Philharmonia Orchestra
> Jochum / London Philharmonic Orchestra
> 
> I consider all three sets very good.


I own these three sets as well, and agree completely with you.


----------



## JACE

Marsilius said:


> I seem to be in a minority in enjoying the second most of all. The live Beecham performance (from the Edinburgh Festival, I seem to recall) is tremendous.


On most days, Brahms' Second is my favorite too. 

And my favorite recording is Bruno Walter's with the Columbia SO.


----------



## JACE

starthrower said:


> I bought this 5 disc set from importcds for the ridiculous price of 8 dollars. Contains the 4 symphonies, 2 piano concertos, violin, and double concertos, variations, and overtures. All performed by famous soloists and world class orchestras. http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=225384
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.importcds.com/ultimate-brahms-various-artists/028947817406


ST, I really dig the Haitink/Arrau Piano Concertos in that set. A friend of mine loaned me the LPs a few years back. I might just need to get the set for those two works. 

What do you think of Sawallisch's way with the symphonies?


----------



## Guest

My favorite Brahms symphony is the second and I love the Haitink recording dearly.I have the complete sets of ,
1 Haitink
2 Klemperer
3 Solti
4 karajan 
5 Adrian Boult


----------



## JACE

My favorites would probably look something like this:

Sym. No. 1 - Jochum, LPO (EMI)
Sym. No. 2 - Walter, Columbia SO (Sony)
Sym. No. 3 - Walter, Columbia SO (Sony)
Sym. No. 4 - Karajan, Berlin PO (DG, from the 1964 cycle)


----------



## AClockworkOrange

My favourite Cycle is Sir Adrian Boult & the London Philharmonic Orchestra. It is hard to believe this resulted from free time in the Studio after other recording projects, it is simply outstanding.

Fighting for a close second place woul be 
- Otto Klemperer & the Philharmonia 
- Sergiu Celibidache & the Münchner Philharmoniker
- Leonard Bernstein & the Wiener 

Following closely would be Furtwängler, Wand, Skrowaczewski, Abbado (Berlin) & Jochum (EMI) amongst one or two others. I 

My favourite Symphony used to be the First but now, the Second has overtaken it.

Some favourite loose recordings (not part of complete sets) of the Symphonies include:
- Klaus Tennstedt & the LPO - Symphonies Nos. 1 & 3
- Pierre Monteux & the Wiener Philharmoniker - Symphony No.2
- Sir Thomas Beecham & the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra - Symphony No.2
- Leopold Stokowski & the Philharmonia (BBC Legends) - Symphony No.4


----------



## jimsumner

Traverso said:


> My favorite Brahms symphony is the second and I love the Haitink recording dearly.I have the complete sets of ,
> 1 Haitink
> 2 Klemperer
> 3 Solti
> 4 karajan
> 5 Adrian Boult


Just curious, but which Haitink cycle. He has three.


----------



## sbmonty

I began with Brahms when I first began listening more to classical music. I initially struggled enjoying the symphonies. I thought I had the wrong set (for me), so I kept looking for others. Now I think the frustration was just getting used to the orchestration and dynamics of the music in general, as I was so new to it. I really enjoy them now and can hear so many terrific melodies.
Sets owned:

Haintink RCO
Abbado BP
Levine CSO
Rattle BP
Harnoncourt BP
Gardiner ORR
Klemperer Philharmonia

Individual recordings:
Kleiber WP No. 4
Szell Czech Phil No. 1 (coupled with a terrific Dvořák No. 8)
Steinburg Pittsburgh No. 2


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

I had forgotten about the very fine Steinberg Brahms Second(mentioned at the bottom of sbmonty's list above), which emerged originally as a Command gold label lp, which I still own.

While a student at Florida State University many years back, I had the opportunity to see and hear a live concert given by William Steinberg and the Pittsburgh Symphony. The feature work on the program was the Bruckner Seventh. Following completion of the concert, I had a most enjoyable time speaking and kidding with the conductor backstage. A very gregarious and funny man, he reminded me of the late comedian, Victor Borge, remembered by some here but, I imagine, either forgotten or never heard of by others...A wonderful experience from my college days.


----------



## damianjb1

I'm sorry to sound dumb - but could someone give me advice on posting an image? I used to be able to do it without any problems but now I can't get it to work.
I use the 'insert image' icon above - but it won't work for me.


----------



## ArgumentativeOldGit

It is no doubt true that Brahms wasn't much of an innovator (though Scohönberg, for one, thought otherwise), but innovation is not the sole criterion of greatness: there is much to be said for doing established things well.

I have long loved the four symphonies, and there are far too many wonderful recordings for me to list here. I particularly love Klemperer's recordings - that sound he gets, with the winds to the fore and the strings relatively recessed, seems just right - and his recording of the third I find particularly moving.

I always think of Brahms' 4th symphony standing alongside Tchaikovsky's 6th as the greatest of tragic symphonies (although i do realise that one may make the case also for Mahler's 6th, and for Sibelius' 4th). Both Brahms' 4th and Tchaikovsky's 6th were composed when the composers were in their early 50s, at the height of their powers; in both, the third movement sounds as if it could be the finale; and in both, we end with movements of startling originality, and an almost overpowering passionate intensity. But once these similarities are out of the way, the differences are extraordinary, and endlessly fascinating. I doubt I'll ever tire of these two magnificent works.


----------



## sbmonty

damianjb1 said:


> I'm sorry to sound dumb - but could someone give me advice on posting an image? I used to be able to do it without any problems but now I can't get it to work.
> I use the 'insert image' icon above - but it won't work for me.


Not dumb at all. I just recently figured it out. Choose the insert image icon. Copy the image address you wish to post. Choose "from URL" option. Paste the image address. You can preview in Go Advanced option to ensure it appears as you wish. Then post. Hope that helps. This is for images obtained online.


----------



## damianjb1

Thank you. Very much appreciated.


----------



## damianjb1

sbmonty said:


> Not dumb at all. I just recently figured it out. Choose the insert image icon. Copy the image address you wish to post. Choose "from URL" option. Paste the image address. You can preview in Go Advanced option to ensure it appears as you wish. Then post. Hope that helps. This is for images obtained online.


Thanks so much. Any idea how to do it if the image is already on my computer?


----------



## KenOC

damianjb1 said:


> Thanks so much. Any idea how to do it if the image is already on my computer?


See post #3 in this thread:

http://www.talkclassical.com/45348-posting-pictures.html


----------



## chill782002

Symphony 1 - Bruno Walter / New York Philharmonic (1953, Studio)

Symphony 2 - Bernard Haitink / London Symphony Orchestra (2003, Live)

Symphony 3 - Eugen Jochum / Berliner Philharmoniker (1956, Studio)

Symphony 4 - Wilhelm Furtwangler / Berliner Philharmoniker (1943, Live)


----------



## superhorn

The Brahms symphonies might not seem to be as immediately revolutionary as those of Beethoven, but they are still highly individual works with the unique personality of Brahms showing on every bar .
Remember, Schoenberg write a thought-provoking essay called "Brahms the progressive ". 
He studied the music of Brahms carefully and closely from his youth and learned so much about harmony , orchestration , counterpoint and form from the Hamburg master . There's no question, Schoenberg would not have been Schoenberg without Brahms .
Bruckner, on the other hand, wrote one of the most radical and revolutionary works of the 19th century, his unfinished 9th symphony, where he actually anticipates Schoenberg and other 20th century composers harmonically to an astonishing degree . 
The daring harmonies & grinding dissonances of the symphony , its many passages of uncertain tonality , make it unique in 19th century music .


----------



## DoenitzDerBedrohung

The Charles Munch Recording of the 4th on RCA Red Seal is phenomenal, as is the 1st with Bernstein/NY Phil. on Columbia (Sony) Masterworks recording, both from the early 1960's. The Walter/Columbia SO recording of the 1st, also from the late '50's and re-issued in the early '60s is also SINE QUA NON, but I prefer my tympany to be more distinct, and the overall pace to be livelier.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

chill782002 said:


> Symphony 3 - Eugen Jochum / Berliner Philharmoniker (1956, Studio)


This one's a gem. A better interpretation methinks than his later Third with the London Philharmonic in stereo.


----------



## AlanB

Recently came across a recording of the complete set by the West Australian Symphony Orchestra conducted by Asher Fisch.....thank you Jerry (Jandl100). Live recording at the Perth Concert Hall. Stunning reality and the playing is absolutely wonderful. Brahmsiams out there.....well worth a listen. :clap:


----------

