# Beethoven's Ninth



## 4/4player

One word: Magnificent.

Anyone care to add anything? 

4/4player


----------



## Topaz

*4/4:* There's only one thing better than Beethoven's Ninth.

And it's .......

No you guessed wrong.

It's Beethoven Ninth conducted by Wilhelm Furtwangler, Bayreuth Festival. This is the Everest of classical music, the definitive version for me and many others.

Topaz


----------



## Hexameron

Well, I might as well do some promotions of my own. You haven't heard all the subtle textures and nuances of the Ninth until you've heard Liszt's own piano transcription.


----------



## Shane

Topaz said:


> *4/4:* There's only one thing better than Beethoven's Ninth.
> 
> And it's .......
> 
> No you guessed wrong.
> 
> It's Beethoven Ninth conducted by Wilhelm Furtwangler, Bayreuth Festival. This is the Everest of classical music, the definitive version for me and many others.
> 
> Topaz


Agreed on the Furtwanger. I listen to that recording religiously.
Although, I'm wondering, can you suggest any newer hi-fi recordings of the 9th that would have a similar passion? I don't expect the Furtwangler to ever be matched, but I'd like to supplement my collection with a fiery rendition that fully utilizes modern sound.


----------



## BassFromOboe

I am probably in a minority of one, but I do not rate it that highly. The Charles Mackerras recording of 1991 is one that is regarded highly by some.


----------



## Topaz

*Shane: * I agree that listening to Furtwangler/Bayreuth is almost a "religious" experience. I find it untouched by any other versions. But obviously I don't have all versions. I have done a bit of research on this matter, and understand that there are two other comparable performances. One is, in fact, an earlier recording by Furtwangler/BPO in, I think, 1943/44. I am informed it is very moving indeed. Some people also rate the later "Lucerne" version. Another is by Fricsay on DG4635252, which some say is the best S9 of the whole lot. I don't have any of these. I'm afraid I only have Bayreuth (plus a few other more modern ones, like Giulini and Kempe, that aren't worth mentioning). I've just been too lazy to find the earlier recording by Furtwangler, and the one by Fricsay. If someone offered them to me right now I'd buy them, on the spot, no hesitation.

As for Mackerras' S9, I'm sure it's very good but it won't sound like Furtwangler, who is incomparable. Mackerras is precise and controlled. Furtwangler was passionate and involved, and got the orchestra to yield a unique sound. I know you asked for a modern recording. I might give Abbado a try.

The following are the main recs (mainly but not solely among the older school of conductors) I have picked up on my travels:

S1 - *Toscanini (39), *Karajan (77), Walter, *Rattle/BPO*
S2 - *Klemperer,* Mackerras
S3 - Toscanini (39), Furtwangler (44, 52), *Klemperer (61)*
S4 - Walter, Mackerras, *C Kleiber*, Soti, Abbado
S5 - *C Kleiber*, Bohm, Abbado, Klemperer (EMI 66865 mono)
S6 - *Bohm*, Ashkenazy, Walter (59), Abbado
S7 - *C Kleiber*, Abbado, Klemperer
S8 - Abbado, Furtwangler (53), *Harnoncourt*
S9 - *Furtwangler* (44, *Bayreuth,* Lucerne), Fricsay, Karajan (77)

My favourites are in bold. As you will see, my favourite S8 is Harnoncourt, even though it's a very modern recording. It's faultless and the sound is ultra good. I also like Rattle's S1/BPO, which is also obviously very new.

P.S. I am going to buy soon Kleiber S5/S7 on DVD audio (i.e. 96 khz). I have the ordinary CD but this DVD audio version should be a real stunner; the bit rate is enormously greater than standard CDs.

Topaz


----------



## Shane

Topaz said:


> My favourites are in bold. As you will see, my favourite S8 is Harnoncourt, even though it's a very modern recording. It's faultless and the sound is ultra good. I also like Rattle's S1/BPO, which is also obviously very new.
> 
> Topaz


Yes, no shame in Harnoncourt at all. He is a great conductor, very intense. I have the DVD of his Fidelio and only wish he would get more time in front of the camera 

As for recent recordings (not of the ninth), lately I have been enjoying Haitink's 2 & 6 with the LSO. He did record the whole cycle. Judging by the quality of the one disc I have, I would say its probably worth picking up.


----------



## Kurkikohtaus

Hexameron said:


> You haven't heard all the subtle textures and nuances of the Ninth until you've heard Liszt's own piano transcription.


I prefer the subtle textures and nuances created by the synthesizer version of the Turkish March in the 9th's Finale used in A Clockwork Orange.


----------



## 4/4player

Hmm..Thanks for your replies guys..
Topaz..what traits/qualities makes that Wilhelm Furtwangler, Bayreuth Festival recording of Beethoven's Ninth so wonderful? Im just curious,thats all.....hehe

4/4player


----------



## Topaz

*4/4 * Why do I like Furtwangler's Bayreuth version of Beethoven's S9?

First some info on the BPO:

Chief conductors of the BPO (founded in 1882)

Ludwig von Brenner (1882-1887) 
Hans von Bülow (1887-1892) 
Arthur Nikisch (1895-1922) 
Wilhelm Furtwängler (1922-1945) 
Leo Borchard (June-August 1945) 
Sergiu Celibidache (1945-1952) 
Wilhelm Furtwängler (1952-1954) 
Herbert von Karajan (1954-1989) 
Claudio Abbado (1989-2002) 
Sir Simon Rattle (2002- )
Wilhelm Furtwangler is regarded as one of the best conductors in history, and certainly one of the foremost interpretors of Beethoven. He had a unique conducting technique which involved rather long and awkward arm movements, and a swaying body, as if he was being controlled like a puppet. It looked very strange, but it worked, and he was very highly regarded. His famous contemporary, Arturo Toscanini, was extremely haughty, well regarded and very cynical of most other conductors but he had the very highest estimation of Furtwangler, whom he regarded as his equal!

Although Furtwangler made several recordings of Beethoven's Ninth, three are always singled out as the best: 1942 (Berlin), 1951 (Bayreuth), and 1954 (Lucerne). These are widely regarded as classics. I am not saying they are universally liked. It depends on how people like their Beethoven. I like mine Furtwangler-style, Klemperer-style, and Carlos Kleiber style. I don't like many modern, more clinical versions.

People debate which of these Furtwangler recordings is the best. Some say the 1942 was the most powerful and dramatic; some prefer 1954 (Lucerne), which was Furtwangler's personal favourite. However, I think if a poll were taken, the Bayreuth 1951 version would probably win it because it had a lot going for it: great atmosphere, good acoustics from the Bayreuth Theatre, good chorus, and superb solo singers.

Trying to say why I like the 1951 version is a but difficult, but here goes. The first thing is that it's a live recording and you do get the odd cough but it is not off-putting. On the contrary, the atmosphere is better for it being live. Here are a few observations:

First movement: It improves as it progresses. Listen to the drums about 7 minutes before the end of this movement, and the surrounding drama, which then gives way to peace; it then picks up again with a gorgeous unique, Furtwangler flavour to the whole thing.

In the second movement, follow the changes of pace and mood, the pregnant pauses, the drums, the beautiful way the strings interplay with the woodwind, the distant horn, the sheer mastery of control over all this activity.

The opening of the third movement does it for me every time. It is divine, and again no one does this better than Furtwangler. Silky strings, beautiful melody, perfect pace, occasional drumbeat. Then, 3 minutes in from the beginning of the movement, it hits the heights. From then on it must be one of the best creations in the whole of music. I cannot think of anything better. The variation on the theme holds your attention, together with the beauty of the strings, and the mutiplicity of activity all over the orchestra is held in good balance.

The fourth movement contains four sections (or sub-movements). The opening section is full of drama; the development of the theme is then shown; the basses begin, then recede, strings appear mainly cello and bass playing together, the theme develops further, it goes quiet; basses somewhat in the distance appear again, then a solo voice recapitulates the theme, and then the chorus enters. The second section, scherzo is in a march style; listen the clashing of percussion, drama picks up, all under control, then calm again, chorus and orchestral interplay is terrific here, in perfect step. The third section introduces a new theme, which is slow and thoughtful at first and building up to a joyous crescendo, with heavenly chorus, The last section, lasting four minutes, presents yet more variations on previous themes with the vocal elements pre-dominating; and then the orchestra re-enters like a kick in the pants, and the sensation of joy is palpable. There is a stop, momentary pause, and ends in loud jubilation. 
_Oh friends, not these tones! 
Rather let us sing more 
cheerful and more joyful ones. 
Joy! Joy!​_Remember that a deaf man wrote this. And only Beethoven could have done this. No one else reached these composing heights, no one.

As you can see, I really do love both this work and Furtwangler's interpretation of it. I strongly recommend you buy it. Find time on your own, shut the rest of the family out, get yourself a coke, turn up the volume, and soak it up. It is an experience that no other version matches in drama, power, atmosphere, elegance, sheer up-lifting feelgood.

*P.S*. As a budding conductor (15 today), can you see your name on the BPO list above at some future date? That's why I put it there. I wonder.

Topaz


----------



## Shane

Topaz said:


> *4/4 * Why do I like Furtwangler's Bayreuth version of Beethoven's S9?
> 
> First some info on the BPO:
> 
> Chief conductors of the BPO (founded in 1882)
> 
> Ludwig von Brenner (1882-1887)
> Hans von Bülow (1887-1892)
> Arthur Nikisch (1895-1922)
> Wilhelm Furtwängler (1922-1945)
> Leo Borchard (June-August 1945)
> Sergiu Celibidache (1945-1952)
> Wilhelm Furtwängler (1952-1954)
> Herbert von Karajan (1954-1989)
> Claudio Abbado (1989-2002)
> Sir Simon Rattle (2002- )
> Wilhelm Furtwangler is regarded as one of the best conductors in history, and certainly one of the foremost interpretors of Beethoven. He had a unique conducting technique which involved rather long and awkward arm movements, and a swaying body, as if he was being controlled like a puppet. It looked very strange, but it worked, and he was very highly regarded. His famous contemporary, Arturo Toscanini, was extremely haughty, well regarded and very cynical of most other conductors but he had the very highest estimation of Furtwangler, whom he regarded as his equal!
> 
> Although Furtwangler made several recordings of Beethoven's Ninth, three are always singled out as the best: 1942 (Berlin), 1951 (Bayreuth), and 1954 (Lucerne). These are widely regarded as classics. I am not saying they are universally liked. It depends on how people like their Beethoven. I like mine Furtwangler-style, Klemperer-style, and Carlos Kleiber style. I don't like many modern, more clinical versions.
> 
> People debate which of these Furtwangler recordings is the best. Some say the 1942 was the most powerful and dramatic; some prefer 1954 (Lucerne), which was Furtwangler's personal favourite. However, I think if a poll were taken, the Bayreuth 1951 version would probably win it because it had a lot going for it: great atmosphere, good acoustics from the Bayreuth Theatre, good chorus, and superb solo singers.
> 
> Trying to say why I like the 1951 version is a but difficult, but here goes. The first thing is that it's a live recording and you do get the odd cough but it is not off-putting. On the contrary, the atmosphere is better for it being live. Here are a few observations:
> 
> First movement: It improves as it progresses. Listen to the drums about 7 minutes before the end of this movement, and the surrounding drama, which then gives way to peace; it then picks up again with a gorgeous unique, Furtwangler flavour to the whole thing.
> 
> In the second movement, follow the changes of pace and mood, the pregnant pauses, the drums, the beautiful way the strings interplay with the woodwind, the distant horn, the sheer mastery of control over all this activity.
> 
> The opening of the third movement does it for me every time. It is divine, and again no one does this better than Furtwangler. Silky strings, beautiful melody, perfect pace, occasional drumbeat. Then, 3 minutes in from the beginning of the movement, it hits the heights. From then on it must be one of the best creations in the whole of music. I cannot think of anything better. The variation on the theme holds your attention, together with the beauty of the strings, and the mutiplicity of activity all over the orchestra is held in good balance.
> 
> The fourth movement contains four sections (or sub-movements). The opening section is full of drama; the development of the theme is then shown; the basses begin, then recede, strings appear mainly cello and bass playing together, the theme develops further, it goes quiet; basses somewhat in the distance appear again, then a solo voice recapitulates the theme, and then the chorus enters. The second section, scherzo is in a march style; listen the clashing of percussion, drama picks up, all under control, then calm again, chorus and orchestral interplay is terrific here, in perfect step. The third section introduces a new theme, which is slow and thoughtful at first and building up to a joyous crescendo, with heavenly chorus, The last section, lasting four minutes, presents yet more variations on previous themes with the vocal elements pre-dominating; and then the orchestra re-enters like a kick in the pants, and the sensation of joy is palpable. There is a stop, momentary pause, and ends in loud jubilation.
> _Oh friends, not these tones!
> Rather let us sing more
> cheerful and more joyful ones.
> Joy! Joy!​_Remember that a deaf man wrote this. And only Beethoven could have done this. No one else reached these composing heights, no one.
> 
> As you can see, I really do love both this work and Furtwangler's interpretation of it. I strongly recommend you buy it. Find time on your own, shut the rest of the family out, get yourself a coke, turn up the volume, and soak it up. It is an experience that no other version matches in drama, power, atmosphere, elegance, sheer up-lifting feelgood.
> 
> *P.S*. As a budding conductor (15 today), can you see your name on the BPO list above at some future date? That's why I put it there. I wonder.
> 
> Topaz


While I agree wholeheartedly with Topaz's opinion, I recommend grabbing *coffee* (or latte) before turning up the volume 

Also, in regards to the "kick in the pants" of the finale, I have heard that this is much more intense and dramatic in the 1942 version. But I haven't gotten around to purchasing a copy of that yet to verify it.


----------



## johnnyx

I'd say Furtwangler, Toscanini, and Klemperer


----------



## Kurkikohtaus

Topaz said:


> Chief conductors of the BPO (founded in 1882)
> 
> Leo Borchard (June-August 1945)


Wow. *Leo Borchard*. I never heard of him, talk about a footnote in music history. Well done in digging that one up.



Topaz said:


> The fourth movement contains four sections (or sub-movements).


Technically speaking, the 4th mvmt is a Theme-and-Variations organized into Sonata Form. I will not bore you all by explaining which variation corresponds to which point in the Sonata, but it is very important to realize that this movement is what it is, *because no-one in the history of music ever tried to do this again*. Rondo-Sonatas aboud, but I guess no-one fealt they could rise to Beethoven's challenge in this regard.

There is one tiny little example, it is the second movment of Sibelius' 3rd Symphony, but I would call that a "Theme and Variations with Sonata Elements", it is not in Sonata form perse. Also, it's intent is completely different, it is a "miniature", while the finale of Beethoven's 9th is what it is.



Topaz said:


> Find time on your own, shut the rest of the family out, *get yourself a coke*, turn up the volume, and soak it up.


Martini for me, please. I know, Martinis and Beethoven hardly go together but I've never really needed an excuse to drink them anyway.


----------



## Topaz

*Kurki...*

A Martini with Beethoven!!!

I was addressing my comments to 4/4, and as regards the appropriate drink to recommend, I had to bear in mind that he was only 14.99 at the time, and I didn't want his parents bearing down hard on either the organisers of this Forum or me if I had recommended anything more alcoholic than a coke. They could have come back and found him intoxicated if I had recommended a martini.

As for not knowing about Leo Borchard, I bet 4/4 knew about that. Incidendentally, who was he?

I had a look round the internet a couple days ago to see what's being recommended these days for S9. There are several recommendations. I decided to buy another two versions. One is a 1998 re-mastering of Klemperer/Philharmonia. The other was Barenboim/Staatskapelle. I already had HVK/BPO (77), Giulini/LSO, Abbado/BPO, Furtwangler/Bayreuth, Toscanini/NBC, the Klemperer/Philharmonia (previous mastering), and a couple of radio broadcast recordings (Wand and a Solti).

I still prefer Furtwangler. I don't know how he did it but Furtwangler got that flippin orchestra to sound positively divine in the third movement. It is such a magnificent piece anyway, but under the baton of Furtwangler it assumes heavenly proportions. On top of that, he gave the whole symphony an impossible-to-define mystical flavour. I was very impressed with both of my new acquisitions. The Klemperer 1998 re-mastering is definitely an improvement. It has better bass and the woodwinds are clearer. Barenboim is superb too. Both of these have better quality sound by far, free of any noise. The Barenboim was particularly clean. I just found the solo voices in this not quite up to the same standard as in the Furtwangler or Klemperer, but it's only nit-picking. These three are the best I have, no doubt. I'm now on the lookout for Fricsay's version.

Topaz


----------



## tahnak

Topaz said:


> *4/4:* There's only one thing better than Beethoven's Ninth.
> 
> And it's .......
> 
> No you guessed wrong.
> 
> It's Beethoven Ninth conducted by Wilhelm Furtwangler, Bayreuth Festival. This is the Everest of classical music, the definitive version for me and many others.
> 
> Topaz


Indeed. This is the best performance of the symphony.
Yet, do not shut your ears to Roger Norrington, Leonard Bernstein, Igor markevitch, Herbert Von Karajan, Georg Solti and Zubin Mehta. All are capable, spiritual versions and Furtwangler towers above them all.


----------



## superhorn

Carlos Kleiber? He never recorded the 9th,and I don't know if he ever conducted it live,which is odd. You'd think this was right up his alley. His father Erich,did however record it with the Vienna Philharmonic for Decca, but I'm not sure if this is currently available. I had it on LP long ago. Good but not one of the greatest. A bit too matter-of-fact.
There are so many things Kleiber junior never recorded.Too bad.


----------



## Manxfeeder

tahnak said:


> Indeed. This is the best performance of the symphony.
> Yet, do not shut your ears to Roger Norrington, Leonard Bernstein, Igor markevitch, Herbert Von Karajan, Georg Solti and Zubin Mehta. All are capable, spiritual versions and Furtwangler towers above them all.


You're talking about the EMI recording with Schwarzkopf singing soprano, right? I've always preferred the 1942 version, but I'll listen to this one again. I mean, any excuse to hear Furtwangler conduct is a good one.


----------



## Sebastien Melmoth

I've said this before: I wish Beethoven had gone with his original intention of using the finale of the late a-minor SQ as an instrumental conclusion to the Ninth.

Sometimes I just listen to the first three sublime movements.

Yeah, the Ode is great, but, well, sometimes I would prefer a purely instrumental conclusion à la Bruckner.


----------



## Manxfeeder

Sebastien Melmoth said:


> Yeah, the Ode is great, but, well, sometimes I would prefer a purely instrumental conclusion à la Bruckner.


I see your point. But Beethoven was the most human of composers, and this conclusion has spoken to the whole world.


----------



## Almaviva

Topaz said:


> P.S. I am going to buy soon Kleiber S5/S7 on DVD audio (i.e. 96 khz). I have the ordinary CD but this DVD audio version should be a real stunner; the bit rate is enormously greater than standard CDs.
> 
> Topaz


Are you aware that this has been released at a bargain price?










It's ten DVDs for $70. Spectacular. Beethoven's 4th and 7th are included. There's also Brahms 2 and 4, Mozart 33 and 36, two New Year Eve's concerts and three operas.


----------



## Moscow-Mahler

> Yet, do not shut your ears to Roger Norrington, Leonard Bernstein, Igor markevitch, Herbert Von Karajan, *Georg Solti *and Zubin Mehta. All are capable, spiritual versions and Furtwangler towers above them all.


Solti's 1971 recording of Beethoven's Ninth is excellent indeed (I bouht only this one on a sigle disk, not the box-set). It's not "brutal" (for my years, Solti is brutal in Alpensinphonie by Strauss, but not here). I think he should have used The Chicago Symphony Chorus for Mahler's Eighth, not Wiener Singverein. The bass Talvela and all the sopranos are wonderful.


----------



## Vaneyes

1972 CSO/Solti (London/Decca/Penguin Classics) does it for me.


----------



## gr8gunz

The 1972 recording of CSO with Solti at the podium is fantastic. Just rereleased on CD too.


----------



## superhorn

The Rattle recording is with the Vienna Phil,not the Berlin Phil. I don't know if he's going to record them again with Berlin,but that would be excess duplication.
It's part of Rattle's complete set on WEMI,which is also available singly.


----------



## Art Rock

The first three movements are decent. The famous fourth grates my nerves.


----------



## Edward Elgar

Art Rock said:


> The first three movements are decent. The famous fourth grates my nerves.


??? The best symphonic send off in the repertoire?! What specifically do you take issue with? If it grates your nerves it should be in a good way!


----------



## Art Rock

Why on earth should I respond to a piece the same way you and many others do? I hate it. I can't stand it. No matter how many people think it is perfect, I don't. I find the use of voices here artificial, forced, and the famous tune awful.


----------



## Chris

Edward Elgar said:


> ??? The best symphonic send off in the repertoire?! What specifically do you take issue with? If it grates your nerves it should be in a good way!


Hear, hear. Even the fact of it being hijacked by the European Union can't spoil it.


----------



## Curiosity

Art Rock said:


> Why on earth should I respond to a piece the same way you and many others do? I hate it. I can't stand it. No matter how many people think it is perfect, I don't. I find the use of voices here artificial, forced, and the famous tune awful.


That means only one thing: You have bad taste. No failing on Beethoven's part...


----------



## Art Rock

That has got to be one of the most stupid posts I have seen on this board.


----------



## Aramis

Art Rock said:


> Thta has got to be one of the most stupid posts I have seen on this board.


What would be your top 10?


----------



## Saggy Shelves

Aramis said:


> What would be your top 10?


Are you guys the brothers Schiller/Beethoven had in mind?:lol:


----------



## SixFootScowl

Doesn't get any better than this (for me):


----------



## DavidA

I must confess to being a heretic but I've never got on with Furtwangler's Bayreuth recording. He himself wasn't very happy with it I know.


----------



## DavidA

The best performance of the ninth to me is any of Karajan's versions 63, 77 or 85.

Probably the 77 has the edge. Karajan seems to combine the best of every other version


----------



## DavidA

Just listening to Chailly' ninth. Why the insane rush in the tenor solo?


----------



## hpowders

^^I indicated that in my review on Current Listening. The tempo is ridiculous. Although Beethoven would have sadistically been delighted I think.

More importantly to me, why does Chailly rush through the great third movement adagio? This is not a waltz-like andante.
I'll always prefer Karajan's and Wand's way with this movement.


----------



## DavidA

I would recommend Klemperer's ninth too. A very uphill struggle towards Joy but it grips.

And then there is a certain gentleman named toscanini!


----------



## arpeggio

I have mentioned this before. I have twice had the opportunity of performing Beethoven's _Ninth_. It is the most awesome work I have ever performed.


----------



## jflatter

I listened to Böhm's recording of the 9th with the VPO this week. I enjoyed it up to the last movement which I found too overblown and overly operatic.


----------



## DiesIraeCX

jflatter said:


> I listened to Böhm's recording of the 9th with the VPO this week. I enjoyed it up to the last movement which I found too overblown and overly operatic.


Let me post this first before PetrB beats me to it  ... Perhaps you found Böhm's last movement too overblown and overly operatic because the music _itself_ is too overblown and overly operatic!

I'm kidding, of course. I've never heard Böhm's 9th, but the way you describe his treatment of the Finale reminds me of Fricsay's, which I love. It's my 2nd favorite 9th recording because of the Finale. Some of it is a bit exaggerated, but not too much. I really do think the Finale itself is exaggerated, but I think Beethoven knew that, the entire movement is unlike anything else he wrote! So a bit of exaggeration or operatic-ness suits it well, I think.


----------



## Woodduck

DavidA said:


> Just listening to Chailly' ninth. Why the insane rush in the tenor solo?


This is one of my pet peeves in performances of the Ninth. I think conductors want the succeeding orchestral fughetto to be as wild and frantic as possible and so are forced to rush the village-band march that precedes it. Furtwangler, whose outrageous thoughts on this symphony I generally love, was guilty of this. The march should have a natural swagger and swing to it, a manly stride, not a cartoonish chicken-step. Then we can savor the colorful scoring and hear the triplets clearly, and a heroic tenor can really make an effect.


----------



## Woodduck

DiesIraeVIX said:


> Let me post this first before PetrB beats me to it  ... Perhaps you found Böhm's last movement too overblown and overly operatic because the music _itself_ is too overblown and overly operatic!
> 
> I'm kidding, of course. I've never heard Böhm's 9th, but the way you describe his treatment of the Finale reminds me of Fricsay's, which I love. It's my 2nd favorite 9th recording because of the Finale. Some of it is a bit exaggerated, but not too much. I really do think the Finale itself is exaggerated, but I think Beethoven knew that, the entire movement is unlike anything else he wrote! So a bit of exaggeration or operatic-ness suits it well, I think.


What can get "too operatic" for me is the solo quartet. The vocal writing is convoluted in places, and fat wobbly voices can make the ensemble quite unpleasant. Clear, focused, legato singing is a must, as well as a soprano who can soar up to that climactic "fluegel" without yelling (it's a nasty vowel to have to sing at that altitude).


----------



## DiesIraeCX

Woodduck said:


> This is one of my pet peeves in performances of the Ninth. I think conductors want the succeeding orchestral fughetto to be as wild and frantic as possible and so are forced to rush the village-band march that precedes it. Furtwangler, whose outrageous thoughts on this symphony I generally love, was guilty of this. *The march should have a natural swagger and swing to it, a manly stride, not a cartoonish chicken-step. Then we can savor the colorful scoring and hear the triplets clearly, and a heroic tenor can really make an effect.*


Yes. *YES*. I'm glad you brought it up, it's one of my pet peeves in performances of the Ninth, as well. This is the only symphony where I'm _extremely_ picky (to an unjustifiable degree :lol, so picky that not even my top 3 recordings of it completely satisfy me! (I own about 15 or 16 Ninth recordings).

What I would love to hear is Mahler and Wagner's Ninth! A man can (day)dream, can't he?


----------



## DiesIraeCX

Woodduck said:


> What can get "too operatic" for me is the solo quartet. The vocal writing is convoluted in places, and fat wobbly voices can make the ensemble quite unpleasant. Clear, focused, legato singing is a must, as well as a soprano who can soar up to that climactic "fluegel" without yelling (it's a nasty vowel to have to sing at that altitude).





Woodduck said:


> What can get "too operatic" for me is the solo quartet. The vocal writing is convoluted in places, and fat wobbly voices can make the ensemble quite unpleasant. Clear, focused, legato singing is a must, as well as a soprano who can soar up to that climactic "fluegel" without yelling (it's a nasty vowel to have to sing at that altitude).


I also agree with this. On my Blu-ray of Christian Thielemann's Ninth with the ViennaPO, there's a special feature, "Discovering Beethoven", where Thielemann and Joachim Kaiser (one Germany's eminent music critics, apparently) discuss the symphonies. Regarding that very solo-quartet, they discuss how incredibly difficult (nigh impossible) it is for the Soprano to "get it right".

Here's a pertinent section from a blog post I wrote on the Ninth's 1824 Premiere:

"Beethoven, by now profoundly deaf, decided to conduct this grand symphony. Beethoven who could not carry on conversations or hear the sounds of music, decided to conduct his most radical of symphonies. Something had to be done, so the concert organizers told Beethoven that Michael Umlauf (Beethoven's friend and renowned conductor) would be on stage with Beethoven but would not interfere too much with his direction. Surprisingly, Beethoven agreed to this plan.

There was only time for a mere two rehearsals, the singers complained to Beethoven that he did not understand the human voice and that their parts were almost impossible. Beethoven, true to character, did not compromise on his creation. He told them to sing exactly as he written. "Karoline Unger, the contralto, threw a tantrum. To Beethoven's face, she called him "a tyrant over all the vocal organs", and turning to her colleagues said, "Well then, we must go on torturing ourselves in the name of God!"" (Suchet). The four soloists decided that they simply would not sing the nearly "impossible" passages, what would be the harm? Beethoven wouldn't be able to hear them anyway, they thought."

"A tyrant over all the vocal organs" :lol:


----------



## phlrdfd

I cant' listen to the piece nearly as often as I did when I was younger, but when I do listen to it, I usually reach for Furtwangler. My favorite, and my introduction to Furtwangler years ago, is the '42 performance with the BPO. But I also love the '51 Bayreuth and '54 Lucerne performances.


----------



## wolfango

I don't like to be snob, but I like the most the Hans Schmidt-Isserstedt recording with the VPO, and Martti Talvela, James King, Marilyn Horne and Dame Joan Sutherland.


----------



## SixFootScowl




----------



## BoggyB

Drinking - and certainly eating - is a distraction that shouldn't be allowed to get in the way of appreciating great music! Beethoven's 9th is probably the top opus of them all, but I don't remember seeing any movements labelled "allegro con cola".


----------



## BoggyB

Sebastien Melmoth said:


> I've said this before: I wish Beethoven had gone with his original intention of using the finale of the late a-minor SQ as an instrumental conclusion to the Ninth.
> 
> Sometimes I just listen to the first three sublime movements.
> 
> Yeah, the Ode is great, but, well, sometimes I would prefer a purely instrumental conclusion à la Bruckner.


I didn't know that about the _allegro appassionato_ string movement. As someone who doesn't like his quartets (shock horror) it would please me if someone would orchestrate this movement to give us a better idea of how it might've fit with the symphony.

Going OT, Gerd Schaller has orchestrated Bruckner's string quintet, which despite not being better than the original format (IMO), was a noble deed.


----------



## Kreisler jr

That finale of op.132 lasts usually a bit over 6 minutes. It is inconceivable for me that it would have shared more than some thematic material with an actual instrumental finale. Even a modest instrumental finale on the scale of the 9th would have been at least twice as long, I think. I suspect that if that material had been used it would have been for a first part with later a turn to the major mode and probably similar devices like fugal sections as in the Eroica or actual choral finale. Roughly some mix or intersection of the op.132 finale, Eroica finale and pompous/fugal Consecration ouverture.
I am an unabashed and devoted fan of the actual choral finale. Despite a few small quibbles, I think it is overall great and miles above the next famous choral symphonic finale (Mahler 2).


----------



## Waehnen

Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony! Talk about high profile symphonic material, and high profile treatment and growth of the material! Talk about immense expressive power. The scale is huge in every direction.


----------

