# If you could only have one LvB symphony cycle...



## SixFootScowl

This is more for those who have multiple Beethoven symphony cycles (I have 6). 
If you could only have one Beethoven symphony cycle (presumably of the ones you already have, which one would it be?

I think I'd make it this one:








The Ninth here includes Soderstrom, Resnik, Vickers and Ward

I will add this is not the greatest Ninth, but then my desert island Ninth is Fricsay and there is not cycle for Fricsay.


----------



## Pugg

*Without any hesitation:*

​


----------



## SixFootScowl

Pugg said:


> *Without any hesitation:*
> 
> ​


Forgot about that one and it is very expensive anywhere I look or I would have it by now.


----------



## KenOC

Anyway, Haitink bettered that cycle (by a good margin) with his excellent LSO cycle.


----------



## Pugg

Florestan said:


> Forgot about that one and it is very expensive anywhere I look or I would have it by now.


There's now price on good music.


----------



## KenOC

Easy winner in the value-for-money category: The Beethoven symphony cycle in the super-budget download "Genius of Beethoven." Really excellent, vigorous performances of the symphonies by Rene Leibowitz with the Royal Philharmonic. And good sound too! $2.69 right now at Amazon and includes the concertos and other stuff as well.


----------



## SixFootScowl

KenOC said:


> Anyway, Haitink bettered that cycle (by a good margin) with his excellent LSO cycle.


If so, that is good, because the LSO cycle is available for about 1/3 the cost of the other.


----------



## Pugg

KenOC said:


> Anyway, Haitink bettered that cycle (by a good margin) with his excellent LSO cycle.


Anyway, if we can agree that not all taste are the same, it's fine by me.


----------



## SixFootScowl

I found detailed clips of the Amsterdam Haitink cycle and the Ninth is wonderful, but I cannot find any clips with the vocal parts for the LSO cycle, so would hate to buy a cycle without first hearing the vocals of the Ninth.


----------



## Enthusiast

It would have to be Harnoncourt's set - it delivers reliably, is well recorded and played and includes a number of "as good as any I know" performances. I do also like the Monteux set (great Pastoral!) and some of the Haitink LSO Live set but the main contenders for me - the ones who might push Harnoncourt off the summit - would be Karajan (the 60s set), Solti and Vanska.


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet

Wand with the NDRSO.


----------



## Templeton

So many great options to choose from but my favourite is probably Karl Böhm's cycle with the Vienna Philharmonic. A really terrific recent cycle, also available on DVD, is Paavo Järvi's with the Deutsche Kammerphilharmonie Bremen.


----------



## D Smith

I'd be happy with this one (HKV 60's) , if I could swap in Monteux's recording of the 6th from Florestan's set (but I suppose that's against the rules.)


----------



## Barbebleu

My favourite on period instruments. For a modern instrument version the first Karajan would be my personal choice.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Barbebleu said:


> View attachment 85188
> 
> 
> My favourite on period instruments. For a modern instrument version the first Karajan would be my personal choice.


But the recording method has some quirkiness, one mike in the middle and kind of a thin sound resulted. I have it by the way, but listed for sale on Ebay.


----------



## KenOC

Florestan said:


> I will add this is not the greatest Ninth, but then my desert island Ninth is Fricsay and there is not cycle for Fricsay.


Some consider the Fricsay 9th the greatest ever. It was the very first stereo recording of the 9th in 1957, but you'd never guess it from the sound. I think it's as close to a perfect performance as we're likely to hear. Soloists are Irmgard Seefried, Maureen Forrester, Ernst Haefliger, and Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau.

Ferenc Fricsay was a truly great conductor from a country that has produced so many great conductors. He died of cancer at 48. Who knows what was lost?


----------



## SixFootScowl

For the record, I have the following LvB symphony cycles:

Monteux
Ferencsik
Szell
Bernstein NYPO
Wand
Hanover
Leibowitz

And as much of a cycle as exists for Fricsay: 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, and 9.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

My first post (I have been a long time reader). And on one of my favorite classical subjects!

I have owned or borrowed most of the well known cycles over 3+ decades. I'm talking over 25 cycles. So far I have not heard Kletzki, Davis, Weller, Jarvi, or Walter. So I still have something to look forward to. 

If the nazi music police made me choose one cycle, I would toss Bohm, Szell, Immerseel, Abbado, and Joachim in a hat and pick one. 

I'm a bit of a Beethoven cycle junkie.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

-1963

Followed by:




























-1950s with the Philharmonia


----------



## Dr Johnson

At the moment I only have this one:










But last night I ordered this one (partly as a result of watching this programme).


----------



## Weston

For those of you who would choose Szell, what is it about him you find appealing? 

I have a few of his LvB symphonies, and I can't say I dislike them, but neither are they all that passionate it seems to me. Sometimes this is a good thing, allowing me to hear the structures better, but more often than not I prefer a blood and thunder approach to Beethoven such as the 60s Karajan mentioned earlier.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

Weston said:


> For those of you who would choose Szell, what is it about him you find appealing?
> 
> I have a few of his LvB symphonies, and I can't say I dislike them, but neither are they all that passionate it seems to me. Sometimes this is a good thing, allowing me to hear the structures better, but more often than not I prefer a blood and thunder approach to Beethoven such as the 60s Karajan mentioned earlier.


For the cycle, I find Szell overall solid. He, Abbado and Bohm make the fewest mis steps IMO and deliver a strong overall cycle, Jochum mostly delivers exceptional symphonies with a few more weak points but when he is on he is exceptional. I like his ninth quite a lot and maybe that weighs heavy for me. I find it one of the best ever done. I also find the sound quality of my recordings to be quite good, which you can't always say of some of the older masters like Klemperer and Furtwangler. Both of them have excellent cycles but the recordings I have spoil them.

I do have a 60's Karajan which I like and maybe I would throw that one in the hat if the nazi music police ever show up. I had Karajan's last cycle on loan and found it appalling.


----------



## AClockworkOrange

Choosing one set is so incredibly difficult. It doesn't allow for the different approaches to be represented - Old-School, HIP, Hybrid and/or Chamber Orchestra based.

As much as I would like to say Furtwängler, speaking in terms of cycles as a whole, there are a couple of weak-ish spots. That said, his Fifth & Ninth are exemplary. Fricsay's Ninth is one of the few which come close.

_At this moment in time_, I would go with *Wolfgang Sawallisch and the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra*. Wonderfully performed and recorded by a Conductor who has a firm grasp of the music and puts the wishes of the Composer ahead of ego and artifice. Sawallisch & the Concertgebouw are remarkably consistent throughout the cycle.

To me, it is a superb and well balanced cycle with no glaring weak points.


----------



## SixFootScowl

AClockworkOrange said:


> _At this moment in time_, I would go with *Wolfgang Sawallisch and the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra*. Wonderfully performed and recorded by a Conductor who has a firm grasp of the music and puts the wishes of the Composer ahead of ego and artifice. Sawallisch & the Concertgebouw are remarkably consistent throughout the cycle.
> 
> To me, it is a superb and well balanced cycle with no glaring weak points.


How does Sawallisch compare to Haitink?

Hey look, can get it with the Brahms symphony cycle together:


----------



## Pugg

Florestan said:


> How does Sawallisch compare to Haitink?
> 
> Hey look, can get it with the Brahms symphony cycle together:


Go for it, must be a reasonable price.


----------



## geralmar

Bruno Walter, Columbia Symphony. Comfortable as an old sweater-- probably not much of a recommendation for many.


----------



## KenOC

I enjoy the Walter cycle for his second, even more so for his fourth, and possibly the best Pastoral available. The Columbia recordings are available in very nice Sony remasters for a song.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B...feature_browse-bin:625150011&s=dmusic&sr=1-13


----------



## AClockworkOrange

Florestan said:


> How does Sawallisch compare to Haitink?
> 
> Hey look, can get it with the Brahms symphony cycle together:


That is the set I have, it is excellent value - both cycles are superbly performed.

As for the Haitink comparison - it depends which cycle you mean. I haven't heard the older Phillips cycle so I cannot comment on it.

Haitinks cycle with the LSO is very good. It is an SACD set, one the LSO's better recrodings in terms of sound quality. I have only listened in Stereo so I cannot comment on the multi-channel quality. It is a very modern interpretation - a hybrid of the old-school full modern orchestral approach with some nods to the views and knowledge from the HIP approach. It is a very effective cycle.

Personally, I prefer Sawallisch. I prefer the sound and recording of the Royal Concertgebouw. The acoustic is more favourable and the recorded sound has a touch more depth without any loss of clarity. Sawallisch's approach being squarely on the music means the performances haven't aged and compare strongly with both older schools of Beethoven interpretation and more recent Hybrid approaches.

Both sets are excellent in sound quality and performance and you get an excellent cycle with both. Of the two though, I prefer Sawallisch.

How is Monteux's Beethoven? I understand it is well respected but I have neither heard any of it or any comments on the cycle beyond it being respected/regarded positively.


----------



## Itullian

Klemperer and Bohm for me.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Hard to compare symphony cycles. I am going to focus on one symphony and compare them between all that I own:

Monteux
Ferencsik
Szell
Bernstein NYPO
Wand
Hanover
Leibowitz

I'll start with the 4th symphony.


----------



## Guest

Hmmm, my top ones are Gardiner, Vanska, and Szell. I don't have the Karajan 60's set, just the 9th. 

Of those three, Vanska is my favorite.


----------



## jflatter

If forced to have one. This would be it


----------



## Guest

Karajan's '60s set.


----------



## DavidA

It is a problem to find a cycle where every performance meets requirements. Karajan's 60s cycle is probably the best all round although I'd like to substitute his 77 6th which is a fresher performance in the opening two movements.


----------



## DavidA

Weston said:


> *For those of you who would choose Szell, what is it about him you find appealing?
> *
> I have a few of his LvB symphonies, and I can't say I dislike them, but neither are they all that passionate it seems to me. Sometimes this is a good thing, allowing me to hear the structures better, but more often than not I prefer a blood and thunder approach to Beethoven such as the 60s Karajan mentioned earlier.


i remember when Szell's performances first came out, one critic said 'nothing more workmanlike'. He was probably right. Just lacking that ounce of inspiration of the best performances. Mind you, hear his Egmont Incidental music with the VPO. On a different plane!


----------



## DavidA

Oldhoosierdude said:


> For the cycle, I find Szell overall solid. He, Abbado and Bohm make the fewest mis steps IMO and deliver a strong overall cycle, Jochum mostly delivers exceptional symphonies with a few more weak points but when he is on he is exceptional. I like his ninth quite a lot and maybe that weighs heavy for me. I find it one of the best ever done. I also find the sound quality of my recordings to be quite good, which you can't always say of some of the older masters like Klemperer and Furtwangler. Both of them have excellent cycles but the recordings I have spoil them.
> 
> I do have a 60's Karajan which I like and maybe I would throw that one in the hat if the nazi music police ever show up. I had *Karajan's last cycle on loan and found it appalling*.


'Appalling' is not the word I would use. 'Unnecessary' perhaps. The set was recorded in troubled times with the BPO and the performances are not quite up to the 63 and 77 sets, a tremendous Eroica apart. The recording was not as clear as the earlier sets either.


----------



## SixFootScowl

I am listening to the Szell 4th right now and liking it a lot. I listened to all my 4ths today and all were fine, even the Hanover Band. The big advantage for a single cycle collection is that Szell has the best Ninth I have found next to Fricsay, and that is important.


----------



## SixFootScowl

I had Zinman's 3 and 4 on a CD and just listened to the 4th. WOW! This is high energy Beethoven! I like it. Maybe this is the cycle for me?

I think the comparable cycles to Zinman are Gardiner and if Zander had a cycle, but I think Zander has only recorded a few of the symphonies.

The more I listen to Zinman's 3, 4, and 9, which I also have, the more I think this is the cycle for me. And the Ninth has pretty good vocals too.


----------



## bz3

I'd probably say the 60's Karajan set too. I recently got the Vanska and enjoy it, but I don't like its 7th very much (the 4th-6th I quite enjoy). Gardiner's is a fine set, but Immerseel surpasses him in a few symphonies (1, 5, 7, 8) as a HIP set IMO, and like most I enjoy bigger band 9th renditions - though Gardiner's 9th is quite good. I like Bohm's cycle, and Harnoncourt's, and Abbado's all top to bottom.

But just for 1, it's tough to surpass the 60's Karajan. Next up would probably be Harnoncourt. If I buy another one anytime soon I think it will probably be 70's Karajan - seems as though many listeners prefer a few of these performances over the 60's cycle.


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet

Florestan said:


> I had Zinman's 3 and 4 on a CD and just listened to the 4th. WOW! This is high energy Beethoven! I like it. Maybe this is the cycle for me?
> 
> I think the comparable cycles to Zinman are Gardiner and if Zander had a cycle, but I think Zander has only recorded a few of the symphonies.
> 
> The more I listen to Zinman's 3, 4, and 9, which I also have, the more I think this is the cycle for me. And the Ninth has pretty good vocals too.


I love the Zinman but I don't think it's the single cycle to have. He takes very fast tempos and the orchestra is lightweigh(as in chamber-like) compared to the conventional big orchestra recordings. But I don't think there is such a thing as a single definitive cycle of the symphonies. I love the extra detail I hear in Zimnan (largely the result of the strings not overbearing the other instruments) but I also love a heavier version such as Wand's.

EDIT: and of course, I neglected to remember that the thread title was "If you could have only one LvB cycle ... "

No, I couldn't


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet

Florestan said:


> I am listening to the Szell 4th right now and liking it a lot. I listened to all my 4ths today and all were fine, even the Hanover Band. The big advantage for a single cycle collection is that Szell has the best Ninth I have found next to Fricsay, and that is important.


Wand's 4th is one of my favorite Beethoven recordings. How do you compare it to the rest?


----------



## Vaneyes

BPO/HvK 60's or 70's with latest remastering. Harnoncourt and P. Jarvi, honorable mentions. :tiphat:


----------



## Vaneyes

DavidA said:


> It is a problem to find a cycle where every performance meets requirements. Karajan's 60s cycle is probably the best all round although I'd like to substitute his 77 6th which is a fresher performance in the opening two movements.


I'd go further, and add 5 & 9 from the 70's set. Conveniently available here with very good remasterings...


----------



## SixFootScowl

TwoFlutesOneTrumpet said:


> I love the Zinman but I don't think it's the single cycle to have. He takes very fast tempos and the orchestra is lightweigh(as in chamber-like) compared to the conventional big orchestra recordings. But I don't think there is such a thing as a single definitive cycle of the symphonies. I love the extra detail I hear in Zimnan (largely the result of the strings not overbearing the other instruments) but I also love a heavier version such as Wand's.


You are correct. Probably Szell for one with a great Ninth.



TwoFlutesOneTrumpet said:


> Wand's 4th is one of my favorite Beethoven recordings. How do you compare it to the rest?


I would have to listen more before I could say how Wand's 4th rates among them all, but on balance, Wand is a very good cycle. Wand was my first cycle after a garage sale find of Walter, but Walter seemed too slow for me so I gave it away.


----------



## Pugg

I will stick by Haitink and the Royal Concertgeouw orchestra.


----------



## dieter

DrMike said:


> Hmmm, my top ones are Gardiner, Vanska, and Szell. I don't have the Karajan 60's set, just the 9th.
> 
> Of those three, Vanska is my favorite.


I heard the Vanska 2nd on the radio today: or parts of it. I really liked it. I have the 3rd and 9th, like those too.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

DavidA said:


> 'Appalling' is not the word I would use. 'Unnecessary' perhaps. The set was recorded in troubled times with the BPO and the performances are not quite up to the 63 and 77 sets, a tremendous Eroica apart. The recording was not as clear as the earlier sets either.


Appalling may be too strong. It is way different from the 63 set. And could be that quality, as you said, colored my listening. I shouldn't make those kinds of statements. Some people may really like that set.


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT

I'm a big fan of Hogwood's cycle. He has/had the knack of bringing out details in the score that few other conductors do in this repertoire, a factor that is only enhanced by the clear, crisp playing of the Academy of Ancient Music.


----------



## AClockworkOrange

Reichstag aus LICHT said:


> I'm a big fan of Hogwood's cycle. He has/had the knack of bringing out details in the score that few other conductors do in this repertoire, a factor that is only enhanced by the clear, crisp playing of the Academy of Ancient Music.


I do have a lot of love for Hogwood's Beethoven with the Acadamey of Ancient Music. It was the first HIP Beethoven cycle I heard and thoroughly enjoyed. Some of the tempo choices in the Ninth aside, I cannot find fault with it and I would choose it ahead of Brüggen, Immerseel, Gardiner or Harnoncourt's Chamber-HIP Hybrid every time.

The Piano Concertos featuring Lubin, Hogwood & the AofAM are equally rewarding.


----------



## DavidA

Florestan said:


> You are correct. Probably Szell for one with a great Ninth.


There is a problem with Szell's soprano soloist in the finale. Also a lack of inner warmth in the slow movement. The slow movement if fiendishly difficult to bring off. I'd say the Karajan 77 does it.


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT

DavidA said:


> The slow movement if fiendishly difficult to bring off. I'd say the Karajan 77 does it.


Unfortunately, Karajan's 77 Ninth is let down by a somewhat uneven contribution from the Wiener Singverein, particularly the men.


----------



## DavidA

Reichstag aus LICHT said:


> Unfortunately, Karajan's 77 Ninth is let down by a somewhat uneven contribution from the Wiener Singverein, particularly the men.


They weren't the greatest choir around but HvK had this sense of loyalty to them. I don't think it is 'let down' but other choirs (e.g. Philharmonia or Monteverdi) did it better. Gardiner's finale is very fine but the rest is pretty moderate and the slow movement awful!


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet

Oldhoosierdude said:


> Appalling may be too strong. It is way different from the 63 set. And could be that quality, as you said, colored my listening. I shouldn't make those kinds of statements. Some people may really like that set.


I only have the 3rd, 4th and 7th from the 80s cycle. The 7th is a fine performance but the 3rd and 4th, especially the latter are a disappointment. The sound is also not very good(although the 7th is decent). DG's engineers messed this one up.


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet

Reichstag aus LICHT said:


> Unfortunately, Karajan's 77 Ninth is let down by a somewhat uneven contribution from the Wiener Singverein, particularly the men.


I love the 77 Karajan 9th. The first 3 movements are fantastic. Given that I can overlook some uneven singing in the last movement.


----------



## realdealblues

I had over 60 complete cycles on CD.

Abbado (I, II & II)
Barenboim (I & II)
Bernstein (I & II)
Blomstedt
Bohm
Bruggen (I & II)
Chailly
Cluytens
Dausgaard
Davis
Dohnanyi
Furtwangler
Gardiner
Gielen
Haitink (I, II & III)
Harnoncourt
Hogwood
Immerseel
Jarvi
Jochum (I, II & III)
Karajan (I, II, III, & IV)
Kegel
Kempe
Klemperer
Kletzki
Krips
Kubelik
Leibowitz
Leinsdorf
Mackerras (I & II)
Marriner
Masur
Monteux
Morris
Muti
Norrington (I & II)
Ormandy
Rattle
Sawallisch
Scherchen
Schmidt-Isserstedt
Schurict
Solti (I & II)
Szell
Toscanini
Vanska
Walter
Wand
Weingartner
Zinman

Might be a couple others I can't recall off the top of my head.

There are some truly great ones that I would never want to be without but if I could only choose one cycle to take with me for an extended period it would be Gunter Wand.

View attachment 85289


To me it's the best "overall" cycle. For me it has no shortcomings and is in excellent sound.

I love the cycles from Szell, Karajan, Bernstein, Bohm, Kletzki, Kubelik, Klemperer, Blomstedt, Jochum, Walter, Toscanini and Furtwangler for lots of different reasons and they are all great cycles in my mind but looking from an overall perspective I don't think Wand can be beat.


----------



## SixFootScowl

realdealblues said:


> I had over 60 complete cycles on CD.
> 
> Abbado (I, II & II)
> ...
> Zinman
> 
> Might be a couple others I can't recall off the top of my head.
> 
> There are some truly great ones that I would never want to be without but if I could only choose one cycle to take with me for an extended period it would be Gunter Wand.
> 
> View attachment 85289
> 
> 
> To me it's the best "overall" cycle. For me it has no shortcomings and is in excellent sound.
> 
> I love the cycles from Szell, Karajan, Bernstein, Bohm, Kletzki, Kubelik, Klemperer, Blomstedt, Jochum, Walter, Toscanini and Furtwangler for lots of different reasons and they are all great cycles in my mind but looking from an overall perspective I don't think Wand can be beat.


Yep, I remember you had a thread trying to figure out which ones to sell off. I appreciate that of all your cycles Wand comes out on top (HPowders continually reminds us that Wand's cycle is excellent and is his top choice).

Wand was my first cycle purposefully purchased (vs the Walter cycle I found at a garage sale for 5 bucks). My wand set is the older one (below) and they split the 6th into 5 tracks resulting in an annoying mid-note track change in one of the later parts.










I see on Amazon that your Wand set also has 5 tracks for the 6th, so wonder how you feel about the mid-note split?

When Muti did the 5th last fall at Hill Auditorium, he only paused between the first, second, and third movements. Movements 3-5 were continuous. Maybe I will splice the MP3 tracks.

I see you don't have Ferencsik or Hanover Band, neither of which would make it to my top positions though.

As I just ordered the Zinman cycle, I am curious how you like it?


----------



## realdealblues

Florestan said:


> Yep, I remember you had a thread trying to figure out which ones to sell off. I appreciate that of all your cycles Wand comes out on top (HPowders continually reminds us that Wand's cycle is excellent and is his top choice).
> 
> Wand was my first cycle purposefully purchased (vs the Walter cycle I found at a garage sale for 5 bucks). My wand set is the older one (below) and they split the 6th into 5 tracks resulting in an annoying mid-note track change in one of the later parts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I see on Amazon that your Wand set also has 5 tracks for the 6th, so wonder how you feel about the mid-note split?
> 
> When Muti did the 5th last fall at Hill Auditorium, he only paused between the first, second, and third movements. Movements 3-5 were continuous. Maybe I will splice the MP3 tracks.
> 
> I see you don't have Ferencsik or Hanover Band, neither of which would make it to my top positions though.
> 
> As I just ordered the Zinman cycle, I am curious how you like it?


Actually I have this one with his amazing Brahms cycle and his Schubert and Bruckner cycles as well.
View attachment 85299

There's 5 movements in the 6th symphony so there are 5 tracks. I've never noticed a mid-note split on my discs or when I ripped them into my iTunes for my iPod. Mine plays straight through with no pause.

I've heard Hanover Band and Ferencsik. Hanover Band does nothing for me. Ferencsik however is interesting to hear. Like Klemperer he put the woodwinds up front where they should be and he was very concerned about balance. The Hungarian State Orchestra has some intonation problems though which bring things down a bit. They have character so it's fun to hear but I wouldn't put it near a top cycle.

Zinman I really didn't care for. Everything sounds rushed to me. He's up there in tempo with Jarvi and Chailly (fast!) but Chailly never sounds rushed to me. It's fast but it doesn't sound like the orchestra is constantly trying to speed up and push faster which is what the Zinman recordings sound like to me. It just feels choppy is the best way I can describe it. It doesn't feel like it really flows from one movement to the next so I was really put off by it. Your mileage may vary though of course.


----------



## Manxfeeder

realdealblues said:


> Zinman I really didn't care for. Everything sounds rushed to me.


I have the same problem. I had a chance to get it at a cheap price, but from listening on Spotify, it didn't ring my chimes, even at that price.


----------



## SixFootScowl

realdealblues said:


> Actually I have this one with his amazing Brahms cycle and his Schubert and Bruckner cycles as well.
> View attachment 85299
> 
> There's 5 movements in the 6th symphony so there are 5 tracks. I've never noticed a mid-note split on my discs or when I ripped them into my iTunes for my iPod. Mine plays straight through with no pause.
> 
> I've heard Hanover Band and Ferencsik. Hanover Band does nothing for me. Ferencsik however is interesting to hear. Like Klemperer he put the woodwinds up front where they should be and he was very concerned about balance. The Hungarian State Orchestra has some intonation problems though which bring things down a bit. They have character so it's fun to hear but I wouldn't put it near a top cycle.
> 
> Zinman I really didn't care for. Everything sounds rushed to me. He's up there in tempo with Jarvi and Chailly (fast!) but Chailly never sounds rushed to me. It's fast but it doesn't sound like the orchestra is constantly trying to speed up and push faster which is what the Zinman recordings sound like to me. It just feels choppy is the best way I can describe it. It doesn't feel like it really flows from one movement to the next so I was really put off by it. Your mileage may vary though of course.


Thanks for the input.
You got the Deluxe Wand set. Nice.
Your mp3 player may be better than mine and seamlessly continue to the next track. 
Nice to hear the positive info on Ferencsik, and sets are relatively low priced used. 
As for Zinman, it was the high energy/speed that grabbed me, but I'll have to see if it has staying power. 
I could have got the Zinman Conducts Beethoven set which also includes the piano concertos and Choral Fantasy. But I rarely listen to the concertos and already have several Choral Fantasy recordings, so didn't want to spend the extra money. I got away for $11 used on the Zinman cycle + shipping, so no great loss if I don't like it. It was a toss up costwise to buying the cycle or adding the three CDs I don't have (1/2, 5,6, 7,8).


----------



## realdealblues

Florestan said:


> Your mp3 player may be better than mine and seamlessly continue to the next track.


I just use an old 160GB iPod Classic. Depending on how you rip it sometimes I've seen programs add a little silence gap at the end of MP3's. You could as you said splice them together which would solve the issue. I used to do that years ago but I abandoned MP3's. I REALLY dislike apple because I hate proprietary systems and I REALLY dislike iTunes, but the classic iPod was the biggest player I could find for storage years ago and would do what I needed. Of course now apple discontinued it so I REALLY despise them!



Florestan said:


> As for Zinman, it was the high energy/speed that grabbed me, but I'll have to see if it has staying power.
> I could have got the Zinman Conducts Beethoven set which also includes the piano concertos and Choral Fantasy. But I rarely listen to the concertos and already have several Choral Fantasy recordings, so didn't want to spend the extra money. I got away for $11 used on the Zinman cycle + shipping, so no great loss if I don't like it. It was a toss up costwise to buying the cycle or adding the three CDs I don't have (1/2, 5,6, 7,8).


It's really kind of funny in a way because I hate the Symphonies but I have the Zinman Conducts Beethoven box set because the Piano Concertos and Triple Concerto with Bronfman are excellent and it was cheaper than buying the Concertos separately. But yeah, if you don't listen to the concertos much I can see where you might not want that set. Maybe you'll like it but yeah, I couldn't stand it. If you want to hear metronome markings Beethoven I still recommend the Chailly cycle. I know some people don't like it but the Gewandhaus Orchestra plays like the devil and the 9th doesn't sound wimpy and skimpy like Zinman or Jarvi. It's kind of an oxymoron but it's big and muscular yet at the same time lean, quick and driven. Whenever I want to hear high energy quick tempo Beethoven, that's the one I reach for because it still retains all the power of Beethoven's writing as well as some of the best playing and sound you can ever hear.


----------



## SixFootScowl

realdealblues said:


> I just use an old 160GB iPod Classic. Depending on how you rip it sometimes I've seen programs add a little silence gap at the end of MP3's. You could as you said splice them together which would solve the issue. I used to do that years ago but I abandoned MP3's. I REALLY dislike apple because I hate proprietary systems and I REALLY dislike iTunes, but the classic iPod was the biggest player I could find for storage years ago and would do what I needed. Of course now apple discontinued it so I REALLY despise them!


I am using a Sansa Clip which is the nicest player I have ever owned. It has 4GB internal memory and a slot for upt to a 16GB Micro SD. That can be switched out to include more music, but chances are one day the Micro will fire off and get lost because the slot is spring loaded. I think the newer Sansa Clips have 8 GB and a larger capacity slot.

I went through my cycles sampling the end of the third movement of Symphony 6 and Bernstein was pretty fast as were most of my cycles. The one that stood out as a tad slower was Wand.


----------



## arpeggio

Another I do not know.

I do know this. I would want a recording where the bassoon player can execute that devilish bassoon solo from the last movement of the _Fourth_.


----------



## PeterF

I have complete sets by Jochum and Bernstein. Of those two I would select Jochum as my favorite.
However I have a number of Beethoven symphonies by each of the following - Walter, Szell, Monteux, and Vanska. Very much enjoy all the recordings by each of them.


----------



## SixFootScowl

TwoFlutesOneTrumpet said:


> I love the Zinman but I don't think it's the single cycle to have. He takes very fast tempos and the orchestra is lightweigh(as in chamber-like) compared to the conventional big orchestra recordings. But I don't think there is such a thing as a single definitive cycle of the symphonies. I love the extra detail I hear in Zimnan (largely the result of the strings not overbearing the other instruments) but I also love a heavier version such as Wand's. ..


On several listens through the Zinman cycle I am more and more convinced it has become my one cycle to never part with. Who needs slower tempos if perhaps Beethoven did not intend them?. Who needs slower tempos if Beethoven did intend them but the music does more for you at higher tempos? I am loving this Zinman cycle!


----------



## Manxfeeder

PeterF said:


> I have complete sets by Jochum and Bernstein.


Is this Jochum's set with the London Symphony?


----------



## realdealblues

Florestan said:


> On several listens through the Zinman cycle I am more and more convinced it has become my one cycle to never part with. Who needs slower tempos if perhaps Beethoven did not intend them?. Who needs slower tempos if Beethoven did intend them but the music does more for you at higher tempos? I am loving this Zinman cycle!


Glad you are liking the cycle. If you want to here fast Beethoven I would still recommend checking out Chailly. The playing of the Gewandhaus Orchestra blows the Zurich Tonhalle orchestra out of the water!

Unfortunately who knows what Beethoven intended. I wouldn't give up the depth of Fricsay or Bohm's 9th or the absolute clarity of Klemperer's cycle for the sake of tempo. One of the greatest highlights in life is to listen to Klemperer's cycle with a nice set of headphones. There's so much you don't hear in most recordings because NO ONE achieved Klemperer's level of clarity. I like symphonies 1 & 8 especially to have a bit more zip than what Klemperer gave us, but there's no denying what Klemperer achieved in his recordings with old world orchestral seating and EMI's production and engineering. I'm still blown away by it after all these years.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Listening to my new Toscanini cycle (1949-1953 recordings) and am well into Symphony #2 and loving it. Looks like it could be either Zinman or Toscanini for top place in my list.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

Can I change my vote? 
I have been listening to some cycles I don't own from my 120 day of Spotify for $. 99. 

Paul Kletzki and the Czech Philharmonic is now my hands down favorite. So much so that I will plunk down 30 some dollars for the actual cds when this spotify thing ends. 

I'm not sure what the criticism would be of this cycle but I find that it outshines the many others I have heard. I really can't find much of a weak spot. It has beautiful sound and recording. His 5th rivals the gold standard of 5ths in Kleiber and the ninth may be the best I have heard. But all of that is subjective to my ears damaged by a few decades of working around jet engines. 

Anyone have experience with this cycle?

As a p.s. I will mention that my budget cycle would be Blomstedt's. I started listening to it on Spotify and liked it, found a budget priced download and pulled the trigger. Some symphonies have their weak spots where it gets perfunctory and a little listless. But overall I venture that it rivals Szell's cycle which I also like quite well. Also beautiful sound quality. The 6th and 9th are fantastic. 
But again I m certainly no expert.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Oldhoosierdude said:


> Can I change my vote?
> ...
> 
> As a p.s. I will mention that my budget cycle would be Blomstedt's. I started listening to it on Spotify and liked it, found a budget priced download and pulled the trigger. Some symphonies have their weak spots where it gets perfunctory and a little listless. But overall I venture that it rivals Szell's cycle which I also like quite well. Also beautiful sound quality. The 6th and 9th are fantastic.
> But again I m certainly no expert.


By all means, change your vote. I started the thread confident in my favorite, then changed to Zinman and now am torn between Zinman and Toscanini. Norrington is in my sights to check out next.

Blomstedt has two different Ninths and one of them I really like a lot.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Am skipping Norrington. I think I am in great shape now with Monteux, Zinman, and the later Toscanini sets. However to get it down to the single cycle is going to be hard. I think I like the Toscanini best but if the sound equipment if very good I will have to lean to Zinman for much better (modern) sound quality. Definitely much better sound on Zinman even in my 2001 Ford base CD player, though Toscanini is not bad at all for it's age.


----------



## realdealblues

Oldhoosierdude said:


> Can I change my vote?
> I have been listening to some cycles I don't own from my 120 day of Spotify for $. 99.
> 
> Paul Kletzki and the Czech Philharmonic is now my hands down favorite. So much so that I will plunk down 30 some dollars for the actual cds when this spotify thing ends.
> 
> I'm not sure what the criticism would be of this cycle but I find that it outshines the many others I have heard. I really can't find much of a weak spot. It has beautiful sound and recording. His 5th rivals the gold standard of 5ths in Kleiber and the ninth may be the best I have heard. But all of that is subjective to my ears damaged by a few decades of working around jet engines.
> 
> Anyone have experience with this cycle?
> 
> As a p.s. I will mention that my budget cycle would be Blomstedt's. I started listening to it on Spotify and liked it, found a budget priced download and pulled the trigger. Some symphonies have their weak spots where it gets perfunctory and a little listless. But overall I venture that it rivals Szell's cycle which I also like quite well. Also beautiful sound quality. The 6th and 9th are fantastic.
> But again I m certainly no expert.


Kletzki's cycle is one of the best. The biggest complaint I've ever heard is that the 1st movement of the 5th Symphony could have a little more fire in it but other than that it's one of the finest sets you will ever hear. Those Czech Brass and Woodwinds are incredible and the string tone is to die for. I also agree that it's a fantastic 9th with some tremendous singing. Very few 9ths are ahead of it in my book. Bohm, Wand and Fricsay are the only ones I can really think of that might edge it out.

Blomstedt's cycle is also one of the best in my book. It's funny because like the Kletzki the only criticism I've heard is that it could use a little more fire and vehemence in the 1st movement of the 5th symphony. But other than that. You've got gorgeous tones from the Staatskapelle Dresden with some fantastic singing in the 9th. Anyone should be happy owning it.

Szell is a different ballgame though in my book. Szell's cycle is very much on the Classical side with very little Romanticism so to speak. Very much in the vein of Toscanini. Lean sonority, clear textures, tempos are much quicker than either Blomstedt or Kletzki with very tight rhythms and amazing orchestral precision. It's one of the best cycles in history and although I would probably rate it higher than Kletzki or Blomstedt it's not by much. It's a must own in my book.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Tough call. Toss up between Klemperer/Philharmonia on EMI and early sixties Karajan/Berlin set on DG


----------



## Kjetil Heggelund

Recently I've only listened to these guys when I need a Beethoven symphony  Don't remember so well what I used to listen to...


----------



## JACE

I would probably choose Jochum with the LSO.

His cycle has my favorite Ninth -- and none of the performances are less than excellent.


----------



## Merl

Kjetil Heggelund said:


> View attachment 88892
> 
> Recently I've only listened to these guys when I need a Beethoven symphony  Don't remember so well what I used to listen to...


Another superb cycle. Only got this recently and it's terrific. The rhythms that Jansons whips up give this a real quality feel.



Oldhoosierdude said:


> Can I change my vote?
> I have been listening to some cycles I don't own from my 120 day of Spotify for $. 99.
> 
> Paul Kletzki and the Czech Philharmonic is now my hands down favorite. So much so that I will plunk down 30 some dollars for the actual cds when this spotify thing ends.
> 
> I'm not sure what the criticism would be of this cycle but I find that it outshines the many others I have heard. I really can't find much of a weak spot. It has beautiful sound and recording. His 5th rivals the gold standard of 5ths in Kleiber and the ninth may be the best I have heard. But all of that is subjective to my ears damaged by a few decades of working around jet engines.
> 
> Anyone have experience with this cycle?
> 
> As a p.s. I will mention that my budget cycle would be Blomstedt's. I started listening to it on Spotify and liked it, found a budget priced download and pulled the trigger. Some symphonies have their weak spots where it gets perfunctory and a little listless. But overall I venture that it rivals Szell's cycle which I also like quite well. Also beautiful sound quality. The 6th and 9th are fantastic.
> But again I m certainly no expert.


To be blatantly honest I dont rate Kletzki's cycle that highly. It's good but no more, for me. I dont really like the sound he creates. It all sounds a bit too restrained. As far as the Blomstedt is concerned I love his 'traditional' cycle. It's tradtional but has wonderful playing, is great recording, doesn't have a poor account of any symphony and a lovely 7th and 9th, in particular. Plus it's cheap as chips.



realdealblues said:


> Szell is a different ballgame though in my book. Szell's cycle is very much on the Classical side with very little Romanticism so to speak. Very much in the vein of Toscanini. Lean sonority, clear textures, tempos are much quicker than either Blomstedt or Kletzki with very tight rhythms and amazing orchestral precision. It's one of the best cycles in history and although I would probably rate it higher than Kletzki or Blomstedt it's not by much. It's a must own in my book.


Totally agree. Just a great set. Like Karajan's 63, a benchmark for all that followed.


----------



## Omicron9

Karajan/BPO; DG, 1963.


----------



## Heck148

The *Monteux* complete Beethoven symphonies are really fine.
*Toscanini/NBC* is really great, probably my first choice, tho I might go for 
*Reiner/CSO* - he never recorded a complete "set" per se - but he did record all of the LvB symphonies - some 2 & 7 a couple of times. They are all first rate, top of the line performances. 
I wish Reiner/CSO had recorded Leonore #3 [they did #2]


----------



## hpowders

The Günter Wand set.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

Couldn't go with just one. I pared down to 1963 Karajan, Walter, Klemperer and for pre-stereo, Weingartner. No set contains my chosen Ninth; for that, it's Reiner/Chicago Symphony.


----------



## KenOC

Just one set? Maybe this set.

Symphony No. 1 - Christopher Hogwood, Academy of Ancient Music
Symphony No. 2 - John Eliot Gardiner, Orchestre Révolutionnaire et Romantique (Archiv)
Symphony No. 3 - Leonard Bernstein, Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra
Symphony No. 4 - Bruno Walter, Columbia Symphony Orchestra
Symphony No. 5 - Wilhelm Furtwangler, Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra 1954
Symphony No. 6 - Bruno Walter, Columbia Symphony Orchestra
Symphony No. 7 - Claudio Abbado, Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra studio
Symphony No. 8 - Paul Kletzki, Czech Philharmonic Orchestra
Symphony No. 9 - Ferenc Fricsay, Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra


----------



## SixFootScowl

KenOC said:


> Just one set? Maybe this set.
> 
> Symphony No. 1 - Christopher Hogwood, Academy of Ancient Music
> Symphony No. 2 - John Eliot Gardiner, Orchestre Révolutionnaire et Romantique (Archiv)
> Symphony No. 3 - Leonard Bernstein, Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra
> Symphony No. 4 - Bruno Walter, Columbia Symphony Orchestra
> Symphony No. 5 - Wilhelm Furtwangler, Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra 1954
> Symphony No. 6 - Bruno Walter, Columbia Symphony Orchestra
> Symphony No. 7 - Claudio Abbado, Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra studio
> Symphony No. 8 - Paul Kletzki, Czech Philharmonic Orchestra
> Symphony No. 9 - Ferenc Fricsay, Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra


I think you should try to modify this list so as to not have the same conductor for more than one symphony. I do give you a very high degree of credit for your selection on the Ninth!


----------



## SixFootScowl

Heck148 said:


> The *Monteux* complete Beethoven symphonies are really fine.
> *Toscanini/NBC* is really great, probably my first choice, tho I might go for
> *Reiner/CSO* - he never recorded a complete "set" per se - but he did record all of the LvB symphonies - some 2 & 7 a couple of times. They are all first rate, top of the line performances.
> I wish Reiner/CSO had recorded Leonore #3 [they did #2]


I am torn between Monteux and Zinman for my ultimate cycle. Ah, the Toscanini is great (I refer to the later one about 1950), but does suffer some from sound quality, so I take Zinman over it (as both are faster tempo).


----------



## Merl

I've tried but I still can't love that Zinman set. It's a grower but it just lacks something. When I compare it to sets by Chailly, Szell, Wand, Pletnev, Kubelik, Rattle, Mackerras, etc, it sounds so empty. I'm currently really enjoying Gielen's set and Norrington's second effort with the SWR. Zinman"s cycle is certainly a very good set but there's so many others that kick it's pants. I've finally ordered Maag's set as it's one of the few ive never heard. Really looking forward to hearing it. A fellow Beethoven symphony addict recommends it very enthusiastically.


----------



## Ralphus

Without hesitation: Harnoncourt/COE (Teldec/Warner)

Other favourites:

Immerseel/Anima Eterna (Zig-Zag)
Kletzki/Czech (Supraphon)
Konwitschny/Leipzig Gewandhaus (Berlin Classics)
Zinman/Tonhalle Zurich (Arte Nova)
Gardiner/ORR (Archiv)

Personally, I couldn't warm to Gielen's set. I'm slowly absorbing Janson's, but am enjoying the couplings more than the Beethoven!


----------



## Merl

I love Jansons' set.


----------



## Mal

Haydn67 said:


> Couldn't go with just one. I pared down to 1963 Karajan, Walter, Klemperer...


I think I could live with Walter & Karajan '63, what does Klemperer bring to the party?


----------



## realdealblues

Mal said:


> I think I could live with Walter & Karajan '63, what does Klemperer bring to the party?


Unbelievable clarity, weight, grandeur and momentum.

One of the biggest gripes of Karajan's cycle is his pushing of the woodwinds too far back. If someone goes from Karajan to Klemperer other than the obvious tempo differences the next thing you would notice would be woodwind playing that you've never heard or possibly even knew existed in the score before.

Comparing Walter's wonderfully warm, light and airy Beethoven to Klemperer you will find Klemperer's style grim, sober, and like a moving mountain.

Klemperer is full of so much detail. He also recorded with split violins and a different orchestral seating that adds so much depth it must be heard to be believed. Klemperer was a momentum builder. He did the same thing in Bruckner which makes his Bruckner 4th, 6th & 7th recordings so amazing. He just builds and builds like a locomotive slowly gathering strength and power until it has so much force it's as if the music has become a mountain, slowly moving towards you with no way to stop it. Just really, really power stuff.


----------



## Mal

I like Klemperer's Mahler 2 for "unbelievable clarity, weight, grandeur and momentum", so I must try him in Beethoven (& Bruckner).


----------



## SixFootScowl

I am still torn between Monteux and Zinman. I would go with the later Toscanini cycle (around the 1950s), but sound quality if a factor. If the later Toscanini were in better sound quality, I would say it is THE cycle to have.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

realdealblues said:


> Unbelievable clarity, weight, grandeur and momentum.
> 
> One of the biggest gripes of Karajan's cycle is his pushing of the woodwinds too far back. If someone goes from Karajan to Klemperer other than the obvious tempo differences the next thing you would notice would be woodwind playing that you've never heard or possibly even knew existed in the score before.
> 
> Comparing Walter's wonderfully warm, light and airy Beethoven to Klemperer you will find Klemperer's style grim, sober, and like a moving mountain.
> 
> Klemperer is full of so much detail. He also recorded with split violins and a different orchestral seating that adds so much depth it must be heard to be believed. Klemperer was a momentum builder. He did the same thing in Bruckner which makes his Bruckner 4th, 6th & 7th recordings so amazing. He just builds and builds like a locomotive slowly gathering strength and power until it has so much force it's as if the music has become a mountain, slowly moving towards you with no way to stop it. Just really, really power stuff.


A very accurately expressed reply by my way of thinking. And yes, Klemperer's partiality to woodwinds has always scored big points with me as well. I also agree with your assessment of his Bruckner. It is his Brahms with the Philharmonia however that I favor most of all---one of the very few sets of this composer's symphonies where I assign an A rating to all four performances.


----------



## DavidA

realdealblues said:


> Unbelievable clarity, weight, grandeur and momentum.
> 
> One of the biggest gripes of Karajan's cycle is his pushing of the woodwinds too far back. If someone goes from Karajan to Klemperer other than the obvious tempo differences the next thing you would notice would be woodwind playing that you've never heard or possibly even knew existed in the score before.
> 
> Comparing Walter's wonderfully warm, light and airy Beethoven to Klemperer you will find Klemperer's style grim, sober, and like a moving mountain.
> 
> Klemperer is full of so much detail. He also recorded with split violins and a different orchestral seating that adds so much depth it must be heard to be believed. Klemperer was a momentum builder. He did the same thing in Bruckner which makes his Bruckner 4th, 6th & 7th recordings so amazing. He just builds and builds like a locomotive slowly gathering strength and power until it has so much force it's as if the music has become a mountain, slowly moving towards you with no way to stop it. Just really, really power stuff.


I agree about Klemperer's balancing and his attention to detail. The problem is that in many of the works he is just too slow. The first movement of his Eroica is anything but Allegro con brio! The first movement of the 5th is almost sedate. He does offer compensations like the magnificently truculent 1955 7th. His ninth is an uphill climb to joy. I have two Klemperer cycles but I prefer the 1963 Karajan as my first choice.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

DavidA said:


> I agree about Klemperer's balancing and his attention to detail. The problem is that in many of the works he is just too slow. The first movement of his Eroica is anything but Allegro con brio! The first movement of the 5th is almost sedate. He does offer compensations like the magnificently truculent 1955 7th. His ninth is an uphill climb to joy. I have two Klemperer cycles but I prefer the 1963 Karajan as my first choice.


Yes, as with any conductor, there is a possible downside to some of Klemperer's performances. You as well as others (myself included) sometimes point to his ponderousness. One critic even used the word, elephantine, to describe a heaviness in interpretation. I too am not especially drawn to his studio recordings of the Beethoven Fifth and Ninth. While I do appreciate most of his Bruckner, I have my reservations about his New Philharmonia Eighth, particularly the last movement. Nor have I been crazy about most of his Schumann Symphony accounts. Love his orchestral Wagner, and like a good portion of his Mozart and Schubert.


----------



## Merl

I've never got on with Klemperer in Beethoven. It's all very well played and he does get some lovely detail but his (lack of) speed is just too much for me to get past. Ive had his 9th for years and of all the versions I own it's probably my least favourite account. It's just personal taste but I'd rather have Haitink, Karajan, Chailly, Fricsay, Leinsdorf or many other accounts over it.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Merl said:


> I've never got on with Klemperer in Beethoven. It's all very well played and he does get some lovely detail *but his (lack of) speed is just too much for me to get past*. Ive had his 9th for years and of all the versions I own it's probably my least favourite account. It's just personal taste but I'd rather have Haitink, Karajan, Chailly, Fricsay, Leinsdorf or many other accounts over it.


Same problem I have. I got a Klemperer cycle for about $10 and quickly off-loaded it along with the slow Walter cycle that I had found for $5 some years ago.


----------



## realdealblues

I feel exceptionally saddened by this overbearing concern over speed. A tribute to some of the greatest musical works in history has been their ability to be played on a multitude of different instruments and at vastly different tempos than originally intended and still stand as amazing works because of nothing more than the succession of notes chosen for the composition. 

Composers used to improvise while playing their works. They wrote variations on themes at vastly different tempos and in different styles. These things were all part of the creative process. Composers/Conductors/Musicians have always taken works and put their own stamp on it. Interpretation has always been a process. 

Even someone like Mahler who wrote many notes on how his works should be conducted and played didn't conduct his own works the exact same way with the exact same tempo every single time. He saw them as living works that grow and change and I can't believe that Beethoven wouldn't have been blown away by hearing Klemperer if he had the ability. He might have said, "Well that's not exactly how I wrote it" but I can't imagine him not being in complete awe of what his works sounded like with that kind of detail, weight, clarity, texture and yes, tempo. The works are strong enough to stand on their own no matter the tempo.

One of the few things I do enjoy about living in this time period is that we don't have to live with one interpretation. We aren't locked into a single recording for the rest of our lives. We can get online and stream hundreds of different recordings for free and that's a wonderful thing. To me you are only limiting yourself if you stick with one style of interpretation when there are so many details within the music itself you are missing out on. I went through so many different Beethoven symphony cycles and I still have more than anyone else I know. My favorite cycles are radically different from each other and give me dozens of different interpretational possibilities. Maybe it's because I am a musician and have both played and wrote literally thousands of different songs/works over my lifetime but I know other non-musicians and artists who feel the same way.

I'm am continuing to become disheartened by this constant objection to interpretation. None of us were alive to hear Beethoven play these works so none of us know exactly how he played them. Artists grow and change and Beethoven was no different than any one else in that respect. I don't believe for a minute he would prefer period instruments to modern ones for example. These were forward thinking artists looking to expand and push new boundaries and interpretation to me is only one of those boundaries that we are fortunate enough to be able to push. If someone wants to follow every minute detail and letter of the score then they should just abandon their recordings and feed the score into a computer and have it play it for you and remove the human element as much as possible. Personally that's nothing I ever want to experience but to each his own.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Well, it's a matter of personal preference for me. The slower interpretations don't click for me. Monteux is as slow as I can (or want to) handle at this time. Perhaps 10 years from now (if I am still alive) I will wish I had kept that Klemperer or Walter set, but I do still have Szell, Wand and Bernstein, which I believe are generally slower tempos than Monteux.


----------



## Mal

I listened to Karajan 63 #1 and #3 yesterday and didn't think the woodwinds sounded too far back. OK the strings are weighty (a great positive!) but the woodwinds shone through OK for me. Are there any particular movements that highlight the differences between Klemperer and Karajan?


----------



## realdealblues

Mal said:


> I listened to Karajan 63 #1 and #3 yesterday and didn't think the woodwinds sounded too far back. OK the strings are weighty (a great positive!) but the woodwinds shone through OK for me. Are there any particular movements that highlight the differences between Klemperer and Karajan?


The finale of Symphony 5 immediately comes to mind. There are lots of small details that are washed over and lost in the 62 Karajan recording that you can hear in the Klemperer recording.


----------



## pcnog11

realdealblues said:


> I had over 60 complete cycles on CD.
> 
> Abbado (I, II & II)
> Barenboim (I & II)
> Bernstein (I & II)
> Blomstedt
> Bohm
> Bruggen (I & II)
> Chailly
> Cluytens
> Dausgaard
> Davis
> Dohnanyi
> Furtwangler
> Gardiner
> Gielen
> Haitink (I, II & III)
> Harnoncourt
> Hogwood
> Immerseel
> Jarvi
> Jochum (I, II & III)
> Karajan (I, II, III, & IV)
> Kegel
> Kempe
> Klemperer
> Kletzki
> Krips
> Kubelik
> Leibowitz
> Leinsdorf
> Mackerras (I & II)
> Marriner
> Masur
> Monteux
> Morris
> Muti
> Norrington (I & II)
> Ormandy
> Rattle
> Sawallisch
> Scherchen
> Schmidt-Isserstedt
> Schurict
> Solti (I & II)
> Szell
> Toscanini
> Vanska
> Walter
> Wand
> Weingartner
> Zinman
> 
> Might be a couple others I can't recall off the top of my head.
> 
> There are some truly great ones that I would never want to be without but if I could only choose one cycle to take with me for an extended period it would be Gunter Wand.
> 
> View attachment 85289
> 
> 
> To me it's the best "overall" cycle. For me it has no shortcomings and is in excellent sound.
> 
> I love the cycles from Szell, Karajan, Bernstein, Bohm, Kletzki, Kubelik, Klemperer, Blomstedt, Jochum, Walter, Toscanini and Furtwangler for lots of different reasons and they are all great cycles in my mind but looking from an overall perspective I don't think Wand can be beat.


How do you find the time to listen to them all?


----------



## hpowders

pcnog11 said:


> How do you find the time to listen to them all?


:lol::lol::lol:


----------



## realdealblues

pcnog11 said:


> How do you find the time to listen to them all?


I have lived, breathed and played music my entire life. I grew up in a music store which my grandfather owned. I use to spend probably 16 hours a day listening, studying and playing music. As an adult my day jobs have always been working on a computer alone in my own office for 8-12 hours a day. I have only been able to sleep on average 4 hours a day because of my back for the last 25 years so I'm awake a lot and I fill that time with music. I've had no children and have never been married so I've had lots of time.


----------



## ArgumentativeOldGit

If I were restricted to just one cycle, I'd choose the live performances conducted by Sir Charles Mackerras, with the Scottish Chamber Orchestra for 1-8, and the Philharmonia for the 9th, on the Hyperion label. These performances are informed by the latest scholarship, but they're by no means museum exhibits, or didactic in any way: each is a living, breathing performance, and each generates an electricity that I, for one, find irresistible. There's not a single weak link in the whole chain. It was almost like hearing these works for the first time.


----------



## Merl

realdealblues said:


> I feel exceptionally saddened by this overbearing concern over speed. A tribute to some of the greatest musical works in history has been their ability to be played on a multitude of different instruments and at vastly different tempos than originally intended and still stand as amazing works because of nothing more than the succession of notes chosen for the composition.


Like Florestan said, Realdealblues, it's not a question of speed for me. I really love Blomstedt's Dresden set and that's on the slower side, as is Leinsdorf's (patchy set with some great moments). I just find Klemperer a bit too slow for my tastes - it just doesn't sound 'right' to me. We still have no idea of the pace Beethoven performed his symphonies, live, but I just find that if they are very slow I lose a bit of interest. However, I agree with you that Klemperer's Beethoven is beautifully played and he coaxes some gorgeous and dramatic playing from the orchestra. I just find that it's not to my taste. Similarly, Norrington's hypersonic LCP set is far too quick in places and it's nowhere near as good as the cycle with the SWR (which I'm really enjoying at the moment). Like you, I have lots of Beethoven cycles and love all or parts of them for a variety of reasons. I just find that I enjoy the mid-paced and quicker-paced sets a little more (with some reservations). Like you said, it's different strokes for different folks.



realdealblues said:


> One of the few things I do enjoy about living in this time period is that we don't have to live with one interpretation. We aren't locked into a single recording for the rest of our lives. We can get online and stream hundreds of different recordings for free and that's a wonderful thing. To me you are only limiting yourself if you stick with one style of interpretation when there are so many details within the music itself you are missing out on. I went through so many different Beethoven symphony cycles and I still have more than anyone else I know. My favorite cycles are radically different from each other and give me dozens of different interpretational possibilities.


^Agreed


----------



## DavidA

realdealblues said:


> I feel exceptionally saddened by this overbearing concern over speed. A tribute to some of the greatest musical works in history has been their ability to be played on a multitude of different instruments and at vastly different tempos than originally intended and still stand as amazing works because of nothing more than the succession of notes chosen for the composition.
> 
> Composers used to improvise while playing their works. They wrote variations on themes at vastly different tempos and in different styles. These things were all part of the creative process. Composers/Conductors/Musicians have always taken works and put their own stamp on it. Interpretation has always been a process.
> 
> Even someone like Mahler who wrote many notes on how his works should be conducted and played didn't conduct his own works the exact same way with the exact same tempo every single time. He saw them as living works that grow and change and I can't believe that Beethoven wouldn't have been blown away by hearing Klemperer if he had the ability. He might have said, "Well that's not exactly how I wrote it" but I can't imagine him not being in complete awe of what his works sounded like with that kind of detail, weight, clarity, texture and yes, tempo. The works are strong enough to stand on their own no matter the tempo.
> 
> *One of the few things I do enjoy about living in this time period is that we don't have to live with one interpretation. We aren't locked into a single recording for the rest of our lives.* We can get online and stream hundreds of different recordings for free and that's a wonderful thing. To me you are only limiting yourself if you stick with one style of interpretation when there are so many details within the music itself you are missing out on. I went through so many different Beethoven symphony cycles and I still have more than anyone else I know. My favorite cycles are radically different from each other and give me dozens of different interpretational possibilities. Maybe it's because I am a musician and have both played and wrote literally thousands of different songs/works over my lifetime but I know other non-musicians and artists who feel the same way.
> 
> I'm am continuing to become disheartened by this constant objection to interpretation. None of us were alive to hear Beethoven play these works so none of us know exactly how he played them. Artists grow and change and Beethoven was no different than any one else in that respect. I don't believe for a minute he would prefer period instruments to modern ones for example. These were forward thinking artists looking to expand and push new boundaries and interpretation to me is only one of those boundaries that we are fortunate enough to be able to push. If someone wants to follow every minute detail and letter of the score then they should just abandon their recordings and feed the score into a computer and have it play it for you and remove the human element as much as possible. Personally that's nothing I ever want to experience but to each his own.


We are really privileged when you think that years ago most people would only hear Beethoven's symphonies once in a lifetime if they were lucky!


----------



## Francis Poulenc

Pugg said:


> *Without any hesitation:*
> 
> ​


What is that? The image doesn't load.


----------



## Merl

Haitink's Concertgebouw set is a good 'traditional' set but I much prefer his more recent live cycle with the LSO. The 7th and 9th with the LSO are particularly impressive. He takes chances (that come off) and the LSO's playing is superb.


----------



## jegreenwood

Putting sound quality aside, the choice for me would be between the very different Szell and Klemperer cycles. Together they make up my imprint versions of the symphonies. In the end, while the granite strength of Klemperer is sometimes just what I need, I suspect Szell's energy and precision would satisfy me more often.

If I could keep Klemperer's 9th the decision would be easier.


----------



## pcnog11

realdealblues said:


> I have lived, breathed and played music my entire life. I grew up in a music store which my grandfather owned. I use to spend probably 16 hours a day listening, studying and playing music. As an adult my day jobs have always been working on a computer alone in my own office for 8-12 hours a day. I have only been able to sleep on average 4 hours a day because of my back for the last 25 years so I'm awake a lot and I fill that time with music. I've had no children and have never been married so I've had lots of time.


I admire the time and the leisure that you have! Great collections!

How many CD in total do you have?


----------



## realdealblues

pcnog11 said:


> I admire the time and the leisure that you have! Great collections!
> 
> How many CD in total do you have?


I wish I could tell you. I have been trying to catalogue it all for decades. I've begun selling off a bit of it at a time as I buy some of the newer mega sized box sets, I don't need many of the individual recordings or smaller box sets I have.

As far as the size of the collection I can tell you my basement is basically a big rectangle with two 100ft. long walls and two 50ft. walls, and my ceiling is approximately 10 ft. high. I have from ceiling to floor on one of the 100ft. walls nothing but CD's and LP's. I still have boxes from when I moved a year ago stacked across one of the 50ft. walls that I haven't had time to go through that are also all full of CD's and LP's.

I really do pity the person that will have to go through it all when I die or the equally sad thought that someone will probably just throw it all in a dumpster when I am gone because none of my relations will appreciate it or listen to it, but it all still brings me immense joy that I'm not ready to downsize yet.


----------



## starthrower

Blues, we should hang out some time. I've had two back surgeries, my house is busting with music, and I've got no wife or kids to distract me. You must have a huge house? I should have bought a bigger place, and now I've got too much crap to move.


----------



## SixFootScowl

realdealblues said:


> I really do pity the person that will have to go through it all when I die or the equally sad thought that someone will probably just throw it all in a dumpster when I am gone because none of my relations will appreciate it or listen to it, but it all still brings me immense joy that I'm not ready to downsize yet.


Make arrangements with a local charity shop that does resell music. Some charity shops even sell on Amazon and Ebay. At least then they will go back into circulation.


----------



## starthrower

realdealblues said:


> As an adult my day jobs have always been working on a computer alone in my own office for 8-12 hours a day. I have only been able to sleep on average 4 hours a day because of my back for the last 25 years so I'm awake a lot and I fill that time with music.


I don't believe in telling people what to do, but all that time spent sitting is probably why your back hurts. Getting out and walking a half hour a day does wonders. And more vigorous exercise at the gym is even better. I learned the hard way, sitting in a tractor trailer all day. Oh it was nice getting paid for solitude and listening to music all day, but it put me on the operating table twice. Now I only drive locally, and I go to the gym every week.


----------



## Vaneyes

Twas nice reading through this thread--yet another on LvB Symphonies, and posters lifestyle glimpses. Certainly this is a clear example of thread redundancy being okay.

One poster asked is it alright to change his mind. ha ha I think back to my Klemps preferences for Eroica, as well as Brahms, Bruckner, others. Eventually, due to his method and my method, we lost each other. No matter, the journey was there.

There can be beauty in detail, urgency, and serviceable aka middle-of-the-road. For the latter, I think the kings have to be Mackerras and Szell. 

I lean on the side of urgency, but not as far as the Scherchen Eroica.

Salute! :tiphat:


----------



## realdealblues

starthrower said:


> I don't believe in telling people what to do, but all that time spent sitting is probably why your back hurts. Getting out and walking a half hour a day does wonders. And more vigorous exercise at the gym is even better. I learned the hard way, sitting in a tractor trailer all day. Oh it was nice getting paid for solitude and listening to music all day, but it put me on the operating table twice. Now I only drive locally, and I go to the gym every week.


Sorry to hear about your back. I can only imagine how bad yours is. I have a vertebrae that constantly rotates out of alignment in one spot and pinches some nerves. I've had a doctors push it back or adjust it or whatever but the next day it rotates back and just kind of stays there. I've never looked into surgery or anything as I've just kind of gotten used to it. It only hurts when I lay down and after about 4-5 hours it's had enough and I have to get up.

I'm also afraid I may have been talking too much in the past tense and feel I might have depicted myself as an old hermit bachelor (although up until a year ago that would have been fairly accurate). The reason why I moved a year ago is because I met a beautiful and wonderful woman and we bought a house together. She accepts me, music addiction and all and so far I haven't scared her off. Actually she's a singer who loves music as much as I do (although she's new to classical).

Anyway, I am fairly active, we are able to go and perform music together and we do normal things, travel, work on the yard, go for walks, etc. so I don't think I have too much lack of exercise per say although my job is still sitting in front of a computer all day. I changed jobs a couple years ago though so where I use to work 12 hour shifts, now I only work 8. I also use to work weekends and now I don't so I'm not in the office as much. But I still spend my work day listening to classical music though as well as the commute to and from. We usually have music on in the house in the evenings unless we decide to watch a movie or something. But music has always just been the major force in my life is where I was trying to go with everything I was saying and it's been my life's work.


----------



## starthrower

If it hurts to lay down, your sciatic nerve might be pinched. That's what happened to me. What helped was sleeping in a recliner chair so I wasn't all the way prone, and walking on the treadmill for 45 minutes several times a week. But the best way to find out what's wrong is to get an MRI scan of your spine.

The sitting can contribute to spinal problems especially if you tend to slouch, because that puts pressure on your discs which can make them bulge or herniate. Putting a pillow or some kind of lumbar support behind your lower back can help. And getting some traction therapy can help too.

Okay, back to Beethoven...


----------



## sbmonty

realdealblues said:


> I had over 60 complete cycles on CD.
> 
> Abbado (I, II & II)
> Barenboim (I & II)
> Bernstein (I & II)
> Blomstedt
> Bohm
> Bruggen (I & II)
> Chailly
> Cluytens
> Dausgaard
> Davis
> Dohnanyi
> Furtwangler
> Gardiner
> Gielen
> Haitink (I, II & III)
> Harnoncourt
> Hogwood
> Immerseel
> Jarvi
> Jochum (I, II & III)
> Karajan (I, II, III, & IV)
> Kegel
> Kempe
> Klemperer
> Kletzki
> Krips
> Kubelik
> Leibowitz
> Leinsdorf
> Mackerras (I & II)
> Marriner
> Masur
> Monteux
> Morris
> Muti
> Norrington (I & II)
> Ormandy
> Rattle
> Sawallisch
> Scherchen
> Schmidt-Isserstedt
> Schurict
> Solti (I & II)
> Szell
> Toscanini
> Vanska
> Walter
> Wand
> Weingartner
> Zinman
> 
> Might be a couple others I can't recall off the top of my head.
> 
> There are some truly great ones that I would never want to be without but if I could only choose one cycle to take with me for an extended period it would be Gunter Wand.
> 
> View attachment 85289
> 
> 
> To me it's the best "overall" cycle. For me it has no shortcomings and is in excellent sound.
> 
> I love the cycles from Szell, Karajan, Bernstein, Bohm, Kletzki, Kubelik, Klemperer, Blomstedt, Jochum, Walter, Toscanini and Furtwangler for lots of different reasons and they are all great cycles in my mind but looking from an overall perspective I don't think Wand can be beat.


Wow. That's impressive. I have 8 sets and all are encompassed within your list. I have Harnoncourt, Zinman, Muti, van Immerseel, Klemperer, Gardiner, Szell and van Karajan 63. I was wondering about Wand's set? I looked earlier but couldn't see it available on Amazon. But your recommendation I hold in high regard. Thanks.

Muti was my first classical music purchase. Years ago as a student. Sentimental cycle for me, but I rarely see it mentioned as a recommendation. Does anyone else know this one well?


----------



## Brahmsian Colors

realdealblues said:


> I had over 60 complete cycles on CD.
> 
> Abbado (I, II & II)
> Barenboim (I & II)
> Bernstein (I & II)
> Blomstedt
> Bohm
> Bruggen (I & II)
> Chailly
> Cluytens
> Dausgaard
> Davis
> Dohnanyi
> Furtwangler
> Gardiner
> Gielen
> Haitink (I, II & III)
> Harnoncourt
> Hogwood
> Immerseel
> Jarvi
> Jochum (I, II & III)
> Karajan (I, II, III, & IV)
> Kegel
> Kempe
> Klemperer
> Kletzki
> Krips
> Kubelik
> Leibowitz
> Leinsdorf
> Mackerras (I & II)
> Marriner
> Masur
> Monteux
> Morris
> Muti
> Norrington (I & II)
> Ormandy
> Rattle
> Sawallisch
> Scherchen
> Schmidt-Isserstedt
> Schurict
> Solti (I & II)
> Szell
> Toscanini
> Vanska
> Walter
> Wand
> Weingartner
> Zinman
> 
> Might be a couple others I can't recall off the top of my head.
> 
> There are some truly great ones that I would never want to be without but if I could only choose one cycle to take with me for an extended period it would be Gunter Wand.
> 
> View attachment 85289
> 
> 
> To me it's the best "overall" cycle. For me it has no shortcomings and is in excellent sound.
> 
> I love the cycles from Szell, Karajan, Bernstein, Bohm, Kletzki, Kubelik, Klemperer, Blomstedt, Jochum, Walter, Toscanini and Furtwangler for lots of different reasons and they are all great cycles in my mind but looking from an overall perspective I don't think Wand can be beat.


Your poor piggybank must have died a terrible death to pay so dearly for all of them.


----------



## SixFootScowl

sbmonty said:


> Wow. That's impressive. I have 8 sets and all are encompassed within your list. I have Harnoncourt, Zinman, Muti, van Immerseel, Klemperer, Gardiner, Szell and van Karajan 63. I was wondering about Wand's set? I looked earlier but couldn't see it available on Amazon. But your recommendation I hold in high regard. Thanks.
> 
> Muti was my first classical music purchase. Years ago as a student. Sentimental cycle for me, but I rarely see it mentioned as a recommendation. Does anyone else know this one well?


He hasn't got Ferencsik, which I have, but he should not lose any sleep over it. Ferencsik is a decent set but nothing outstanding.


----------



## realdealblues

sbmonty said:


> Wow. That's impressive. I have 8 sets and all are encompassed within your list. I have Harnoncourt, Zinman, Muti, van Immerseel, Klemperer, Gardiner, Szell and van Karajan 63. I was wondering about Wand's set? I looked earlier but couldn't see it available on Amazon. But your recommendation I hold in high regard. Thanks.
> 
> Muti was my first classical music purchase. Years ago as a student. Sentimental cycle for me, but I rarely see it mentioned as a recommendation. Does anyone else know this one well?


The best way to get the Wand set is in the "Gunter Wand The Great Recordings" box set. You can usually find it for $30-50. Inside you will find the complete symphonies of Brahms, Beethoven, Bruckner and Schubert with a few other things thrown in but all of his German symphony cycles are excellent. To me his Brahms, Beethoven and Bruckner cycles are legendary. His Schubert cycle is only slightly less fine but if you want a wonderful lifetime of music to explorer you can't go wrong with that box set.

In regards to the Muti cycle all I can say is I'm not sure what happened. On paper it should have been a fantastic cycle with the Philadelphia Orchestra at his disposal. It was recorded earlier on in his career before he started really over micro-managing things, but it just lacks all the firebrand, wit and dynamics that you hear on his benchmark Tchaikovsky cycle or his fantastic Schubert cycle with the Vienna Philharmonic. It has some good moments but overall it was just really disappointing.


----------



## hpowders

Just about everything recorded by Günter Wand is top notch. His Beethoven 9 Symphony set remains my favorite.
No HIP for him. Wand takes time to "smell the roses" and in turn reaches levels of communication that few other conductors do.
I think Beethoven would have been very pleased....with the volume turned way up.


----------



## realdealblues

Haydn67 said:


> Your poor piggybank must have died a terrible death to pay so dearly for all of them.


Those recordings don't even constitute 1% of my collection. There are box sets that I paid more for than all of those Beethoven cycles combined. But seriously a lot of it I paid $5 or less for. Back when you actually could find a music store or record shop in every small town that had a huge rack of used Classical music that NO ONE wanted or back in the mid to late 90's when eBay first started I could buy most of those sets for a couple of bucks. It wasn't the $20 that everyone wants today for a cycle or the $80 for some CD's because they are out of print.


----------



## lextune




----------



## Oldhoosierdude

I couldn't find my previous post so I don't know what I said before. I really, really like the Kletzki cycle, except for the sixth. I would prefer almost any prominent version of the sixth to the Kletzki. 

Overall, if I could only have one, I would take the Szell, and would be happy with the Blomstedt Dresden cycle if need be.
That said, for a few decades of my life I had only a Krips on vinyl and thought it was enough.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

Oldhoosierdude said:


> I couldn't find my previous post so I don't know what I said before. I really, really like the Kletzki cycle, except for the sixth. I would prefer almost any prominent version of the sixth to the Kletzki.
> 
> Overall, if I could only have one, I would take the Szell, and would be happy with the Blomstedt Dresden cycle if need be.
> That said, for a few decades of my life I had only a Krips on vinyl and thought it was enough.


Bruno Walters cycle ranks up there also. I could easily accept it as my only cycle.

About Krips, I've been listening again with good headphones this time, never done that before. The recording quality is terrible at times. There are places during the 6th that sounds like they are moving furniture in the background. As for the orchestration, some people have called it thin and I see why. Compared to some other cycles, thin is a good description AT TIMES. It isn't always the case.


----------



## AfterHours

The ones I've heard where every rendition is top notch or near-top notch (which is very rare for a complete cycle), are Wand/NDR, Karajan/Berlin (1975-77), and Gardiner (1992). Maybe Bernstein (DG) also, but it's been a long time since I revisited it.

There are two recent ones that may join those (Vanska and Chailly), but I need more time with them to be sure.

If I had to choose the best overall, I would say Wand/NDR, though in a sense Gardiner's is more impressive (managing such intensity and expressiveness and articulation on period instruments is really something) ... and then there's Karajan's, which could just as easily be my #1 (even better than his 1963 set imo, mainly due to better recordings, perhaps equals performance-wise)


----------



## bestellen

The Günter Wand set.


----------



## AfterHours

bestellen said:


> The Günter Wand set.


Yes, I've been revisiting various recordings lately, including Wand, and I'd have to modify my statement above to simply say that Wand/NDR is now more clearly the best overall set I know of. Though if Honeck/Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra record a complete cycle at the same quality as their stunning 5th and 7th, then look out, there will be a new sheriff in town, that may not be surpassed for a long time to come.


----------



## Merl

AfterHours said:


> Though if Honeck/Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra record a complete cycle at the same quality as their stunning 5th and 7th, then look out, there will be a new sheriff in town, that may not be surpassed for a long time to come.


Totally agree. That Honeck disc makes even Kleiber's 5th and 7th sound shoddy. It's that good.


----------



## Omicron9

Berlin Phil/Karajan on DG; the 1963 cycle. Everything seems just right.


----------



## Pugg

Omicron9 said:


> Berlin Phil/Karajan on DG; the 1963 cycle. Everything seems just right.


Very good choice!!


----------



## Animal the Drummer

Merl said:


> Totally agree. That Honeck disc makes even Kleiber's 5th and 7th sound shoddy. It's that good.


Disagree. I like it very much, and forced to choose I might well go for Honeck's 7th, but not so for the 5th, besides which I don't see how Kleiber's recording can be described as "shoddy" by any standards.


----------



## Merl

Animal the Drummer said:


> Disagree. I like it very much, and forced to choose I might well go for Honeck's 7th, but not so for the 5th, besides which I don't see how Kleiber's recording can be described as "shoddy" by any standards.


I was being flippant. Kleiber's 5th is superb however, I rate many 7ths above Kleiber's. Neither are 'shoddy'. I was talking about the disc as a whole. I agree that Honeck's 7th is better than his 5th but both are excellent readings.


----------



## Merl

On another thread I promised a quick run-down of this bargain-basement package so here goes. Please bear in mind that this was a super-budget release so I was expecting absolutely nothing from it. I've also based it on a quick skip-thru of the symphonies.

Basically what you've got here is a cycle compiled from mainly one orchestra (almost) with 4 different conductors, generating mixed results. DDD recording, mid-90s (I'm guessing).

Symphonies 1 & 6 : Kicking things off is the best disc of the set. Anzor Kinkladze and the Georgian Simi Festival Orchestra rattle thru an interesting and well-paced 1st Symphony with a particularly good 3rd movement. Enjoyable , slightly bass-heavy performance. Leonid Malyshev conducts the St. Petersburg Festival Symphony Orchestra in a well-judged and very pleasant 6th with a very nice Gathering of Peasants. Enjoyable disc.

Symphonies 2 & 5 : Kinkladze again gets some spirited, if a little ragged, playing from the GSFO, in the 2nd Symphony. I really enjoyed the Finale here - Mr. Kinkladze gets his small forces playing their hearts out. Tsatishvili and the GFSo are less successful in a less interesting 5th which is underplayed. Some tuning issues in the first two movements but committed enough playing and things improve dramatically for the finale. Some distortion in the bass of early movements.

Symphonies 4 & 7 : Things go downhill rapidly on this disc. Jean-Paul Lauriet is in charge of the GSFO on both these and he sounds like he has no idea. Symphony 4 is ponderous and lacks any joie de vivre apart from a rousing, scrappy finale. The 7th is the worst of the whole cycle. An underplayed 1st movement, dour allegretto (hampered by tuning issues and a few bum notes at the beginning of the movement). The presto lacks any bite and the finale is just shambolic. Possibly one of the worst 7ths I've ever heard.

Symphonies 3 & 8 : Tsatishvili gets off to a decent start in the Eroica, gets bogged down a little in the 2nd movement but he certainly knows how to build sound with such limited resources. He gets some lovely rhythms in the final 2 movements. I liked this account. Unfortunately, Mr Lauriet is in charge of the 8th. Although he fares better here than his awful 7th and ponderous 4th he's too slow again. It's all flat and a bit turgid until the finale (again), where I suspect the orchestra completely ignore him and get moving.

Symphony 9 : Mr Tsatishvili is in charge for the big one. He goes for a big band sound and pulls off the first movement at a moderate pace. The 2nd movement is slightly less convincing and the adagio is pleasant but a bit mushy. However, the Gergian forces bring it all together with a rousing (if a little ragged) finale. Tbh, I enjoyed this performance. The soloists are fair but the choir are very good and create an excellent sound. In fact, the sound is good on the whole disc (apart from a slightly distant timpani). Tsatishvili really knows how to play the quiet parts and then build up tension. I like his style of conducting. Nice performance, if not world-beating.

So to sum up, enjoyable enough performances of the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 6th and 9th, poor 5th, 4th & 8th and a shocking 7th.

All in all, I'm pleasantly surprised with this collection. At £1.27 (including postage, secondhand) this is a decent enough bargain. A decent enough introduction to the symphonies for a novice. I expected little but got more. There's still a few left on Amazon at this price. Have a delve and see what you think. It may not be anywhere near the quality of Szell, Rattle, Mackerras, Wand et al but for a provincial orchestra, and lesser known conductors, this is nowhere near as bad as I imagined.


----------



## Schumanniac

I've actually grown very fond of Bernstein's 2004 EMI cycle. Hasnt garnered the reception of his DG recording but i find it an exceptional overall performance. The Eroica is admittedly boring but beyond that i love the tempo and dynamic. Less explosive than many cycles perhaps, but when eruption occurs its shattering, and the more subdued approach lends it even greater weight at its peaks. Also it has the benefit of far better recording equipment to the more celebrated, earlier cycles, which is not to be underestimated.

There is no truly perfect beethoven symphony cycle but Bernstein did do it amazing justice here.

Edit: Realdealblues corrected my failing memory. I meant the 2004 remastering of Bernstein's 70s cycle with DG.


----------



## realdealblues

Schumanniac said:


> I've actually grown very fond of Bernstein's 2004 EMI cycle. Hasnt garnered the reception of his DG recording but i find it an exceptional overall performance. The Eroica is admittedly boring but beyond that i love the tempo and dynamic. Less explosive than many cycles perhaps, but when eruption occurs its shattering, and the more subdued approach lends it even greater weight at its peaks. Also it has the benefit of far better recording equipment to the more celebrated, earlier cycles, which is not to be underestimated.
> 
> There is no truly perfect beethoven symphony cycle but Bernstein did do it amazing justice here.


Bernstein died in 1990 and didn't record a cycle for EMI  Perhaps you meant someone else?


----------



## Pugg

realdealblues said:


> Bernstein died in 1990 and didn't record a cycle for EMI  Perhaps you meant someone else?


I was thinking the same thing.


----------



## Schumanniac

realdealblues said:


> Bernstein died in 1990 and didn't record a cycle for EMI  Perhaps you meant someone else?


Yeah, got things mixed up. Im familiar with a confusing number of beethoven cycles :lol: Im refering to this:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B0015S1Q0O/ref=cm_cr_srp_mb_bdcrb_top?ie=UTF8

It is Bernstein on a 2004 release with Wiener Philharmonica on DG. A remastering os his 70s vinyl perhaps? Either way its exceptional.


----------



## realdealblues

Schumanniac said:


> Yeah, got things mixed up. Im familiar with a confusing number of beethoven cycles :lol: Im refering to this:
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B0015S1Q0O/ref=cm_cr_srp_mb_bdcrb_top?ie=UTF8
> 
> It is Bernstein on a 2004 release with Wiener Philharmonica on DG. A remastering os his 70s vinyl perhaps? Either way its exceptional.


Yes, that's his 70's cycle he recorded with the Vienna Philharmonic. I think it's a great cycle and listeners could do far worse! There are no recordings in that set that are less than good and I think over half of them are excellent.


----------



## premont

realdealblues said:


> Yes, that's his 70's cycle he recorded with the Vienna Philharmonic. I think it's a great cycle and listeners could do far worse! There are no recordings in that set that are less than good and I think over half of them are excellent.


But how would you rate it compared to the New York cycle?


----------



## Pugg

realdealblues said:


> Yes, that's his 70's cycle he recorded with the Vienna Philharmonic. I think it's a great cycle and listeners could do far worse! There are no recordings in that set that are less than good and I think over half of them are excellent.


Is this the same set who's also available as DVD?


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet

I wouldn't want just one set but one set that is worth exploring, based on my recent acquisition of the 7th and 8th pairing, is Jan Willem de Vriend with the The Netherlands Symphony Orchestra. His 7th is now one of my favorite. It is much better than the highly-touted version by Chailly on Decca.


----------



## merlinus

I find Lenny with NYPO far, far more exciting than his tame version with VPO. And in any event, I dislike all of his 9th symphony recordings. IMO he did not "get" this piece of music in the least.

One set I am currently enjoying is Thielemann/VPO.


----------



## realdealblues

premont said:


> But how would you rate it compared to the New York cycle?


I like them both. Myself, I would give the Vienna cycle a 9/10 and the New York cycle an 8/10. The New York cycle is a bit rougher sounding. The orchestra itself wasn't sweet and smooth like the Vienna Philharmonic was in the 70's, but the younger Bernstein's energy and excitement is matched by the feel and sound of the New York orchestra.

The weakest point in the New York cycle is probably the 9th. The singers are average, the chorus is good but nothing spectacular. The bass lines in the 5ths finale have always been a highlight of the New York cycle. They just don't register in Vienna like they do in the New York recording.

Overall it kind of comes down to what you want in a Beethoven cycle. The New York cycle has a bit of a rough edge, it's thrilling and exciting. The Vienna cycle is more refined and polished with beautiful playing, it's almost more spiritual with grander designs. I like them both and both are worth having in my opinion.


----------



## hpowders

bestellen said:


> The Günter Wand set.


My desert island set. The perfect antidote to all those recent sets that are much too fast.

Take time to smell the roses with Wand!


----------



## realdealblues

Pugg said:


> Is this the same set who's also available as DVD?


Yes, I believe it is. I can't remember the exact recording dates on the DVD's but I'm 99% sure they are. I know they were patched and edited to remove crowd noise, applause, etc. on the CD release though.


----------



## premont

realdealblues said:


> I like them both. Myself, I would give the Vienna cycle a 9/10 and the New York cycle an 8/10. The New York cycle is a bit rougher sounding. The orchestra itself wasn't sweet and smooth like the Vienna Philharmonic was in the 70's, but the younger Bernstein's energy and excitement is matched by the feel and sound of the New York orchestra.
> 
> The weakest point in the New York cycle is probably the 9th. The singers are average, the chorus is good but nothing spectacular. The bass lines in the 5ths finale have always been a highlight of the New York cycle. They just don't register in Vienna like they do in the New York recording.
> 
> Overall it kind of comes down to what you want in a Beethoven cycle. The New York cycle has a bit of a rough edge, it's thrilling and exciting. The Vienna cycle is more refined and polished with beautiful playing, it's almost more spiritual with grander designs. I like them both and both are worth having in my opinion.


Thank you, realdealblues, for the elaboration. I only know the New York cycle, and like you I find it exciting. Your description of the Vienna cycle almost makes me feel, that this is not, what I first and foremost look for in Beethoven, but probably I end up purchasing it.


----------



## realdealblues

premont said:


> Thank you, realdealblues, for the elaboration. I only know the New York cycle, and like you I find it exciting. Your description of the Vienna cycle almost makes me feel, that this is not, what I first and foremost look for in Beethoven, but probably I end up purchasing it.


I feel there are many ways to play Beethoven. There's the quick and lean, the slow and grand, the majestic and refined, the rough-edged and intense, the monumental and massive, etc. I think they all work and only speak to the power of Beethoven's symphonies themselves. The fact they can be played so many different ways with different sized orchestras and at vastly different tempos with vastly different feels, and yet they can still captivate and resonate within the listener speaks volumes to me.

If you like Bernstein's New York cycle I believe you will like his Vienna cycle as well. His 1st, 6th, 7th and 9th from the Vienna cycle I would say I prefer to the New York cycle. The others are usually a toss up. Bernstein always projected his love of music in everything he did. Not everyone agrees with his performances but that love and passion are always there and while I may have other recordings I sometimes prefer over Bernstein's when it comes to a multitude of composers, I will always listen to everything he recorded because each one projects his character and love for music and that is something I can always identify with and that always resonates with me.


----------



## SixFootScowl

If only we could bring Beethoven back long enough for him to listen to the many cycles out there and then tell us which, if any, he approves of. He very well may pick an choose for different recordings on each symphony rather than a single cycle. 

I suspect he would approve of the Toscanini cycle (circa 1950).


----------



## Pugg

realdealblues said:


> Yes, I believe it is. I can't remember the exact recording dates on the DVD's but I'm 99% sure they are. I know they were patched and edited to remove crowd noise, applause, etc. on the CD release though.


I did watched the 6th last night, wonderful.


----------



## Merl

I may be one of the few who hears nothing of great interest in both of Bernstein's cycles. I don't dislike them but I just prefer Solti, Rattle (BPO), Barenboim, Blomstedt and Kubelik's superb set well above them. I'm still enjoying Pletnev's set a great deal at the moment. His 6th and 7th have something different to say and improve with repeated listenings. I much prefer Bernstein in Mahler than his Beethoven but, like people have said, it's really down to what kind of Beethoven you wanna hear.many people on here knock Chaillys set but I really like it. Gotta say that, at the moment, I'm really enjoying Norrington's Hannsler set a lot. It ticks all the boxes for me. Blomstedt's classic cycle is still a staple in the car. I find it a hard one to beat for consistency and the 7th and 9th just sound terrific.


----------



## premont

realdealblues said:


> I feel there are many ways to play Beethoven. There's the quick and lean, the slow and grand, the majestic and refined, the rough-edged and intense, the monumental and massive, etc. I think they all work and only speak to the power of Beethoven's symphonies themselves. The fact they can be played so many different ways with different sized orchestras and at vastly different tempos with vastly different feels, and yet they can still captivate and resonate within the listener speaks volumes to me.


I agree completely with this, which is the very reason, why some - I included - collects multiple versions of the same music. To date I own about 35 sets of Beethoven symphonies, and I have put Bernstein's Vienna cycle on my wish list, which at the moment also comprises Haitink's Concertgebouw cycle, Hickocx' cycle and Nelson's cycle.


----------



## premont

Florestan said:


> If only we could bring Beethoven back long enough for him to listen to the many cycles out there and then tell us which, if any, he approves of. He very well may pick an choose for different recordings on each symphony rather than a single cycle.
> 
> I suspect he would approve of the Toscanini cycle (circa 1950).


I am convinced that Beethoven would appreciate the fact. that his music can be interpreted in many different ways.


----------



## realdealblues

Merl said:


> I may be one of the few who hears nothing of great interest in both of Bernstein's cycles. I don't dislike them but I just prefer Solti, Rattle (BPO), Barenboim, Blomstedt and Kubelik's superb set well above them. I'm still enjoying Pletnev's set a great deal at the moment. His 6th and 7th have something different to say and improve with repeated listenings. I much prefer Bernstein in Mahler than his Beethoven but, like people have said, it's really down to what kind of Beethoven you wanna hear.many people on here knock Chaillys set but I really like it. Gotta say that, at the moment, I'm really enjoying Norrington's Hannsler set a lot. It ticks all the boxes for me. Blomstedt's classic cycle is still a staple in the car. I find it a hard one to beat for consistency and the 7th and 9th just sound terrific.


Different strokes as they say. I don't hear much of interest in Solti, Rattle, Barenboim or Pletnev. Blomstedt is a great cycle and so is Kubelik. I also enjoy Chailly's cycle and think it's worth hearing just for the orchestral playing which is simply superb. I like most of Norrinton's Hannsler set, but the 9th is a total flop for me.


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT

premont said:


> I agree completely with this, which is the very reason, why some - I included - collects multiple versions of the same music.


Me too. Rather than play the same few recordings again and again, I like to "mix things up" by listening to different sets in rotation. I have my favourites, of course, but "cycling my cycles" (so to speak) is a great way to hear/discover new things.


----------



## Merl

What do you think of the Jansons, Herreweghe and Davis cycles, realdealblues?


----------



## realdealblues

Merl said:


> What duo think of the Jansons, Herreweghe and Davis cycles, realdealblues?


Herreweghe I can't stand! I'd rather listen to Gardiner whom I can't stand either.

Davis's cycle is good, but not overly special to me. If I want to hear the Dresden orchestra I would pull out Blomstedt instead of Davis and his overall conception a lot of the time is similar to Klemperer but again I'd rather listen to Klemperer any day of the week.

Jansons is quite good. I've only had occasion to hear it once. I could stand to hear it again and probably will give it another spin in the near future. I found it enjoyable but it didn't eclipse any of my current favorites so to speak.

There's really only a few cycles I can't stand. Many of them are just very middle of the road where they just easily become bland or boring. The notes might all be there but there's nothing that really sets them apart.


----------



## Merl

realdealblues said:


> Herreweghe I can't stand! I'd rather listen to Gardiner whom I can't stand either.


I like it but I agree it's very 'marmite' (some love it, some hate it). I've always enjoyed Gardiner's set, too. Lol Totally agree with what you say about Davis though. Give Jansons another try. It's a very good cycle and a lovely 6th and 7th, especially. And yes, there are a lot of very average sets out there. As for Pletnev, I cant stop listening to that set at the moment. It's quirky, highly-individual, intriguing and the playing is top class.


----------



## D Smith

I find it so interesting how different reactions can be from person to person. I had heard good things about the Blomstedt cycle in this forum and others so I recently bought it. It was nothing special to me (though nothing was wrong with it) and I was somewhat disappointed. It just didn't float my boat. On the other hand, I listen to Bernstein (NY) over and over for the vitality and excitement of the performances, yet others found nothing of interest. I think it's great that we have such a multitude of excellent cycles to pick and choose from. I have 10 complete cycles myself and am always interested to listen to others.


----------



## Pugg

realdealblues said:


> Yes, I believe it is. I can't remember the exact recording dates on the DVD's but I'm 99% sure they are. I know they were patched and edited to remove crowd noise, applause, etc. on the CD release though.


I did watched the 9th, breathtaking how the man conducts.....


----------



## Merl

D Smith said:


> I find it so interesting how different reactions can be from person to person.
> ............ I think it's great that we have such a multitude of excellent cycles to pick and choose from. I have 10 complete cycles myself and am always interested to listen to others.


As you say, we all hear things we like. The HIP movement has certainly expanded the collection with mixed results but even the worst period performances have had something new to say. I find I mix my cycles constantly and have at least one HIP and one traditional cycle on the go at the same time. For example I've gone through Kubelik, Drahos, Herreweghe, Gardiner, Norrington 2, Leinsdorf, Barenboim, Karajan 63, Solti in the car over the past 6 months.


----------



## realdealblues

I've been through pretty much every single recorded cycle in the last several years. I owned over 60 or 70 at one point and sold off most of them although many of them I still have because of complete conductor box sets. In the end I decided what recordings registered best with me and I'm content with cycling through the ones I feel worked best. 

I've said it before in several posts, but the biggest thing for me is a pulse for lack of a better word that flows from one movement to the next and makes the work feel complete and natural and whole. I put that above all else. If orchestral precision mattered the most than I wouldn't listen to Furtwangler or Ansermet. If sound quality mattered most I wouldn't listen to Toscanini or Weingartner. If letter of the score mattered most I wouldn't listen to a whole lot of them.

Everyone listens for something different. I listen for a pulse, individuality, intensity, emotion, drama, excitement, all sorts of things. Sure I love orchestral precision and great sound but not at the expense of pulse or individuality. I love big band Beethoven from Furtwangler and Klemperer and Bohm. I love lean, muscular Beethoven like Szell and Toscanini. It's all good to someone out there, it just a matter of deciding for yourself what you like.


----------



## Merl

realdealblues said:


> I listen for a pulse, individuality, intensity, emotion, drama, excitement, all sorts oImmerseel's Sure I love orchestral precision and great sound but not at the expense of pulse or individuality. ......... It's all good to someone out there, it's just a matter of deciding for yourself what you like.


Couldn't agree more. We all hear different things in the music and some performances just resonate with you. For some, Immerseel's set sounds lightweight but for others it's a buoyant and charged HIP set. for some Klemperer is too slow, ponderous and pompous but for others it"s beautiful, rich and luxurious. It's just great that there is a cycle for everyone out there.


----------



## david johnson

I think all of you have said most of what can be said. I have kept these for my collection - Klemperer/emi, Karajan/dg/63, Schmidt-Isserstedt/vpo/decca. I fear I have lost track, has anyone mentioned Hans Schmidt-Isserstedt already? The cycle I want to hear is - Ludwig himself leading the symphonies. I believe that would be very interesting


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT

Merl said:


> Blomstedt and Kubelik's superb set well above them.


Another vote for both Blomstedt and Kubelík. The latter's cycle is superb indeed.


----------



## Merl

Reichstag aus LICHT said:


> Another vote for both Blomstedt and Kubelík. The latter's cycle is superb indeed.


I find myself coming back to Kubelik's cycle a lot, recently. Considering it's recorded with 9 different orchestras it's remarkably consistent and the latter symphonies are particularly warm and yet dynamic. You know a complete cycle is gonna be a winner when the 7th and 9th are top class. I'm currently listening to the Barry Wordsworth / RPO cycle and it's a rather pleasant listen indeed. Reminds me very much of Weller's nice set. Relaxed, spacious accounts with plenty of room for the orchestras to breathe. They might not set the world on fire but for the £5 I paid in total for both sets some years ago, I can't complain. The Wordsworth one is a better set, IMO. His sense of rhythm is lovely in the latter symphonies and his 7th is yery good. Tbh, most of my sets have been picked up on the cheap (some ridiculously cheap - Blomstedt £2, Rattle VPO £3, Erdlinger £2, Weller £3, Szell £5, Karajan 60s 70s & 80s for total of £15, Haitink LSO £7, Zinman £5, etc. The most I've paid for a complete cycle is the Maag one and that was only £20.


----------



## premont

Merl said:


> Barry Wordsworth / RPO cycle and it's a rather pleasant listen indeed. Reminds me very much of Weller's nice set. Relaxed, spacious accounts with plenty of room for the orchestras to breathe. They might not set the world on fire but for the £5 I paid in total for both sets some years ago, I can't complain. The Wordsworth one is a better set, IMO. His sense of rhythm is lovely in the latter symphonies and his 7th is yery good.


This one?

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Beethoven-...97&sr=1-4&keywords=barry+wordsworth+beethoven


----------



## Merl

premont said:


> This one?
> 
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/Beethoven-...97&sr=1-4&keywords=barry+wordsworth+beethoven


Yeah. It's good. Strings are lovely.


----------



## SixFootScowl

premont said:


> This one?
> 
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/Beethoven-...97&sr=1-4&keywords=barry+wordsworth+beethoven


That set lists six different conductors.


----------



## Merl

Florestan said:


> That set lists six different conductors.


Yeah I just call it the Wordsworth cycle cos he does a third of them. LOL. The rest are split. Leppard's 9th is strong. Herbig's 3rd is very good and even out-Karajans Karajan. Hahaha. The 7th is the best of the set. Very impressive performance. The worst of the set is probably Ermler's 6th, which is still a decent performance.


----------



## Überstürzter Neumann

Without question this one:


----------



## DavidM

These are the cycles I know and own, Klemperer Emi, Schuricht Emi, Krips Everest, Karajan x2 63 & 77 dg, Ferencsik, Szell Sony, Bohm dg, Blomstedt, Walter Columbia SO, Rattle Emi, Pletnev DG. Each of them have their virtues and I think what I like about cycles is it gives you a chance to hear a perspective across the cycle. If I had to pick one I would be pressed between Szell and Bohm. I wonder if that is because I was imprinted with them as they were the first two I listened to in great detail. If I was going to make a cycle of individual favorites I might only pick 1 out of those two cycles. Also interesting to me is that Bohm and Szell are quite different in their ways of doing Beethoven.


----------



## Merl

That Szell cycle is one that many people on here would put near the top of their list. It's achieved classic status purely on its own merits by being so bloody good. Like I said, we're like kids in a sweet shop with LvB cycles. So many good ones to hear and enjoy. I think I might sample Dohnanyi's cycle today cos I haven't played it in years and I used to enjoy it.


----------



## jegreenwood

Überstürzter Neumann said:


> Without question this one:
> View attachment 93922


Bought it. Sold it.

Here's to varying tastes.


----------



## Razumovskymas

Toscanini 1939!!








I have the Karajan 50's and 60's, Toscanini 1939, Jos Van Immerseel, Riccardo Chailly, Riccardo Muti.

Sound-wise I prefer Van Immerseel and Chailly so if someone knows a cycle that combines Toscanini's fury with the sound of van Immerseel and Chailly, Thanks!

And no reverb please 

I don't like Karajan.

I really like the sound of Chailly but I think he's doing strange things rhythmically


----------



## SixFootScowl

Razumovskymas said:


> Toscanini 1939!!
> View attachment 94003
> 
> 
> I have the Karajan 50's and 60's, Toscanini 1939, Jos Van Immerseel, Riccardo Chailly, Riccardo Muti.
> 
> Sound-wise I prefer Van Immerseel and Chailly so if someone knows a cycle that combines Toscanini's fury with the sound of van Immerseel and Chailly, Thanks!
> 
> And no reverb please
> 
> I don't like Karajan.
> 
> I really like the sound of Chailly but I think he's doing strange things rhythmically


I suggest you check out the later Toscanini cycle which is about 1950. Much better sound quality too. Sound clips here: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0000CNTLU/


----------



## realdealblues

Razumovskymas said:


> Toscanini 1939!!
> View attachment 94003
> 
> 
> I have the Karajan 50's and 60's, Toscanini 1939, Jos Van Immerseel, Riccardo Chailly, Riccardo Muti.
> 
> Sound-wise I prefer Van Immerseel and Chailly so if someone knows a cycle that combines Toscanini's fury with the sound of van Immerseel and Chailly, Thanks!
> 
> And no reverb please
> 
> I don't like Karajan.
> 
> I really like the sound of Chailly but I think he's doing strange things rhythmically


Karajan was a huge follower of Toscanini's Beethoven style, it's too bad you don't care for him. The two closest cycles to Toscanini's "style" in my mind would be Szell and Chailly. I don't find anything strange with Chailly's rhythms, to me they are perfect for the chosen tempos. Szell was recorded in the late 50's and early 60's so the sound quality is not like Chailly's but it sounds perfectly acceptable to me. Dohnanyi might be worth looking into as he followed Szell in Cleveland and his cycle is of a similar construction with more modern sonics.


----------



## CDs

I only have two so far (Mackerras and Barenboim) both are great but I would pick Mackerras over Barenboim. Although the Barenboim packaging in pretty unique.


----------



## Vaneyes

realdealblues said:


> Karajan was a huge follower of Toscanini's Beethoven style, it's too bad you don't care for him. The two closest cycles to Toscanini's "style" in my mind would be Szell and Chailly. I don't find anything strange with Chailly's rhythms, to me they are perfect for the chosen tempos. Szell was recorded in the late 50's and early 60's so the sound quality is not like Chailly's but it sounds perfectly acceptable to me. Dohnanyi might be worth looking into as he followed Szell in Cleveland and his cycle is of a similar construction with more modern sonics.


Wise words as usual, realdealblues.

For those interested, there are newer remasterings available that significantly enhance the original recorded sound for BPO/HvK et al and Cleveland O./Szell et al.

Regarding Szell, Sony Japan in 2016 reissued his LvB Symphonies in SACD Hybrid--Expensive. In 2013, Sony reissued them with 24-bit remastering--Inexpensive. I haven't heard either, but I doubt that the 2016 CD layer is any better than the 2013 CDs. Cheers! :tiphat:


----------



## Razumovskymas

realdealblues said:


> Karajan was a huge follower of Toscanini's Beethoven style, it's too bad you don't care for him. The two closest cycles to Toscanini's "style" in my mind would be Szell and Chailly. I don't find anything strange with Chailly's rhythms, to me they are perfect for the chosen tempos. Szell was recorded in the late 50's and early 60's so the sound quality is not like Chailly's but it sounds perfectly acceptable to me. Dohnanyi might be worth looking into as he followed Szell in Cleveland and his cycle is of a similar construction with more modern sonics.


Thanks for the recommendations, maybe I should give Karajan another try. I'll certainly give Dohnanyi and Szell a try.

Maybe my perception of the "strange" Chailly-rhythms has something to do with another impression I have with Chailly, namely that he (or the way it is recorded) emphasises other instrument groups compared to the cycles I know.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

I have tried out all of the HVK cycles. 
I wanted to like the most famous one (1963?), kept in on my prime account a long time and listened more than once. It is so well known and favored, but sorry, just not for me. Cluytens recorded the cycle with the same orchestra a few years prior to HVK and i far, far prefer it. Found the Cluytens on ebay for a bargain. Great sound.
I tried out Chailly also. Beautiful sound, great orchestra playing too fast for my taste. I don't mind an uptempo rendering but this was a bit much.


Razumovskymas said:


> Thanks for the recommendations, maybe I should give Karajan another try. I'll certainly give Dohnanyi and Szell a try.
> 
> Maybe my perception of the "strange" Chailly-rhythms has something to do with another impression I have with Chailly, namely that he (or the way it is recorded) emphasises other instrument groups compared to the cycles I know.


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet

Überstürzter Neumann said:


> Without question this one:
> View attachment 93922


I know this set has received many praises but for the life of me, I don't get the hype. It's decent but nowhere near the best, let alone the one.


----------



## Merl

If you don't care for the Karajan sets give Kubelik a try. Superb set.


----------



## Schumanniac

david johnson said:


> The cycle I want to hear is - Ludwig himself leading the symphonies. I believe that would be very interesting


Considering the awkwardness of his shadow conducting of the 9th, cluelessly beating the time even a while after the symphony was over, the actual conductor having told the orchestra just to ignore him, the later symphonies of such a cycle might be disappointing :lol:

The completion of his 10th however! He spoke of creating a new 'gravitational force' in it, pushing the boundaries of music. When he who speaks with the stormy sound of thunder, talks of emulating among the most powerful forces of our universe, one shudders at the thought.


----------

