# Blind Comparison - Sibelius #5



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

I had intended to post this one earlier in the week but held off so as not to conflict with the Beethoven 5th comparison.

As before, here are links to 4 performances of the Sibelius 5th symphony for you to listen, analyze and comment on without the biases of knowing the identity of the conductor & orchestra. There are only 4 as I think that is more than enough listening for a slightly longer work. If you recognize one, please don't post anything that identifies it however feel free PM me. Also PM if you want the answers before I post the details.

Unlike in the past I have given links to folders which contains the 3 movements of the symphony. You can click on the name of the movement to play it.

A - https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=kZM3n37ZFKJn3gmEVF5tPa5utQNJVzLzBXEV
B - https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=kZo3n37ZGa2GvcuKeWQ94GVLbjrnrutnMmck
C - https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=kZ0Gn37ZzfagsGXoT2Y0e7Gq14AGGL7iNCxX
D - https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=kZpGn37Z5E0hnMJustHB7Rul7btumuJu7PlV

Have fun


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Ill listen tomorow, Becca, if i can. If not ill be struggling as i fly out to Spain on monday.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Merl said:


> Ill listen tomorow, Becca, if i can. If not ill be struggling as *i fly out to Spain on monday*.


Such a hardship  (Depending on what airline you are using!)


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Becca said:


> Such a hardship  (Depending on what airline you are using!)


RyanAir. Im taking a dinghy.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Is there anyone else who intends to participate?


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

I will definitely do so. I am going to a family party tomorrow but will start listening tomorrow night. Sibelius is my jam.


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

Certainty, Becca, if time and health permits I'd like to spend some time listening to them next week!


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

If you post the answers first you'll find many more will join in and make cliched comments because they know who the artists are. Are there any slick performances here? Hahahaha. :lol:


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Becca said:


> Is there anyone else who intends to participate?


I'd like to but am not sure I will find the time. I have not been able to post very much on anything here in the last few weeks. I'll try but don't wait for me.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

In progress...................


----------



## AeolianStrains (Apr 4, 2018)

3rd Movement, first few minutes, initial thoughts just to get the ball rolling:

C I like best of all. Clear without sounding overproduced, quick tempo without sounding rushed. Just a clean job. Compared with C, A sounds a bit off. Muted, perhaps? I skipped on B after the first cough, but returning to it, I wasn't crazy about the brass, which sounded a bit shrill. Crazy that A and C end after the same amount of time, but C is quicker in the beginning than A. D's tempo can feel like it drags, but the real turn off is the timpani, which might be too loud.

Playing on dinky logitech speakers


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Right, Ive had a quick listen to most of them. Initial impressions ........well i like all of them in one way or another.

A. I like it. Modern. Dynamics are a little underplayed. Good but i'd like more emotion. Not a big name orchestra?
B. I think i know this as it may be the Sibelius cycle i have in the car at the moment. Live and a very convincing reading. If its the one im thinking of the cycle has highs and lows and this is one of the better performances. Whatever, i rate this.
C. This one has me stumped and in some respects its a frustrating account. There are moments of terrific spontaneity but forward momentum sometimes gets lost however some of the playing is very impressive..
D. Another one I definitely think i have. This is the one. Every element is there and its a superb account. I love those menacing strings, thumping timpani (you know i love a good thwacking timpani) and the finale is just wonderful. In fact im sure its my favourite sibelius 5th from a cracking set. If not I'll definitely be getting this one. Anyhow, I'll say no more.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

There's no contest here. Only one of these conductors consistently gets beneath the notes and opens up the whole, vast panorama of the Sibelian landscape. I've known and loved this work well for fifty years and heard numerous performances, but conductor B is the one who tells me more than I knew, or brings to audible reality what I've always felt is there. From the opening horn call, swelling slowly like the light of sunrise, he lets the work unfold with seeming naturalness, yet thoughtfully, and always with clear purpose - unhurried, patient, knowing that the mountain to be climbed is enormous, but slighting nothing along the trail. This work actually traverses an enormous diversity of moods, and Conductor B brings out all of them, finding character where so many conductors seem bound to the score. His tempos are well-judged, his sense of proportion and climax is flawless, and the final peroration is shattering in its unflagging intensity, weight, and power. I'm wondering whether I've ever heard a more impressive performance of this symphony.

My first impression of Conductor A was that he hadn't a clue what the work was about, but on a second hearing I can see that I got that impression partly from his fast tempos, which limit his expressive possibilities rather severely. Regardless, I don't get much pleasure from the performance. The bassoonist certainly does protest too much, and indulges in an ugly vibrato, in his lonely first movement solo. There's some ugly, blatty brass in the finale, too, which completely fails to come off. 

Between Conductor C and Conductor D I hesitate to choose, but probably prefer the latter slightly. C seems to me to lack a sense of tempo transition, charging too abruptly into the "scherzo" section of the first movement, and slowing down with similar awkwardness where the final movement subsides into quietness. Probably my only real reservation about D is that the horn theme in movement 3 is a bit too smooth and understated.

My order of merit: B, D, C, A.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Fascinating!!! So far there seems to be little agreement about any of them.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

A is clearly live. Someone couldn't even hold their cough in for 45 seconds from the beginning. I like the tempo, but the sound is a bit thin overall. There's just not enough beef in the strings for me.

B is langourous, certainly played well but a little lacking in drama. This approach would be better suited to the 7th, let's say. This one kind of bored me, which Sibelius never does.

C has a richer, fuller sound. The strings underneath the brass are very nice. It's beefy and more thrilling than the others, but still fleet and airy when called for. I like the way the tympani are miked. The tempo is bracing but not rushed. The drama of the third movement's theme comes across nicely. The fermatas at the end are crazy long, though.

Of the slower options, D is the better of the two, because the strings provide much more depth and resonance. I can't help but think that a quicker tempo would benefit the piece, however. 

My preference would be C > D > A > B


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Damn Becca, cant believe you fooled me. I still really like D and the slower reading doesnt bother me, it doesnt come across as especially slow i was sure it was was Oramo but I listened to both D and Oramo this morning and the Oramo recording is better (although timings are very similar) and the timpani is similarly vibrant but the strings growl more for Oramo. However, i will be getting that recording of D. I really like it. Having another quick listen this morning hasn't changed my ranking but has made me appreciate some of the playing in recording B a bit more. As i said, C frustrates me as i like parts of it a lot but theres annoying little things that annoy me (not the playing - thats often excellent). I think Woody summed it up better in his post that it lacked "a sense of tempo transition". It robs the recording of a natural rhythmic thrust. Anyway, great comparison, Becca. I dont play this symphony often enough. Ive resolved that this weekend.

Rank: D B C A


----------



## Guest (Jul 7, 2019)

My order (best first): D, B, C, A

I didn't like C and A. They're both too fast. As noted earlier, there is coughing in A at around 45 secs. 

I think I know the identity of D and B, as I have both of these. 

The version of this symphony I like best of all is none of the above but was recently recommended earlier this year in the BBC's "Building a Library" section of Record Review.


----------



## Malx (Jun 18, 2017)

Having listened to them all this morning with a few little breaks my order of preference is:

B, C, D, A.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

I continue to be fascinated by the varied opinions ... which is good. Thanks to everyone who is taking part.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Becca said:


> I continue to be fascinated by the varied opinions ... which is good. Thanks to everyone who is taking part.


Whats your order of preference, Becca?


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

I would be a bit hard-pressed to fairly answer that as I feel rather OD'd on Sibelius lately, and particularly the 5th. I will say that C impressed me when I came across it and it was the trigger for doing this comparison.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

As there have been quite a few participants so far, I will acknowledge that all 4 are live performances.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

OK. I have listened to all four back-to-back (starting with D). Like most others I liked A the least. It lacked coherence, seeming to ramble in places. Between the other three it is more difficult to choose a favourite. They are each quite different and seem to work well on their own terms. Preference might be down to mood. 

B seems a good example of a fairly "conventional" approach. It has some oomph (I seem to have heard it very differently to MatthewWeflen?) and the conductor can be quite flexible with speeds - unnecessarily so on some occasions but very effectively elsewhere). I liked C but feel it gives us a work that is perhaps less "big" (less profound?) than most conductors do. I found D difficult. It does seem slower than the others and started almost in stillness. It seemed quite an analytical (opposite of organic) approach and makes quite a number of very telling points. It was the one that is most different to recordings I know well. Following this logic my order of preference is D & B > C > A .... but I am very conscious that a second hearing might change that a little.

The real winner is the work. Even though I know it so well it was a pleasure to listen to four times in a row, even A (which I didn't value as highly as the others). I look forward to seeing the identities of each.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

If you want to know the performance details, then click 'reply with quote' to this post. If not, then don't 

All are live performances from YouTube and Vimeo.

A - Jukka-Pekka Saraste - Lahti Symphony
B - Lorin Maazel - Bavarian Radio Symphony
C - Santtu-Matias Rouvali - Gothenburg Symphony
D - Esa-Pekka Salonen - Swedish Radio Symphony


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

Went through all 4 once, while doing other things, so it wasn't exactly attentive listening. 

C stands out for its expressiveness so far. The good recorded sound definitely has swung my preference too.

D is almost as good but I feel that there are moments when it cannot sustain its slow tempo in the middle movement.

B is probably slightly less expressive, but there are perhaps one too many unnatural moments of fussiness for me. 

In fact, I also find C and D fussy at places.....

Comparatively speaking, A is a bit flat in expression, but I don't dislike the unpretentious nature of it, and it certainly does not feel fussy. 

Honestly, Sibelius 5 has never clicked with me. This is the one Sibelius symphony that over time, I'm finding it less and less rewarding for me (to put it nicely). Unlike the 4th, which I always find it difficult to get into its mood, but it's getting more and more rewarding over time whenever I make the effort.

My current preference: C > B › D › A

I might change my mind upon further listening.... I'll see if I can find more time to listen to them during the week.


----------



## hustlefan (Apr 29, 2016)

I learned this symphony from the Karajan 1960's DG recording and it is still my favorite. For me the ideal performance has

1. A lean string sound, not plush.
2. The end of the second movement should have a light throwaway ending in the woodwinds after the gentle, warm resolution in the strings.
3. The last movement should have some feeling of nobility in the brass.

It's somewhat subjective to judge whether a performance has these qualities, but for me
A is 0 for 3
D is 1 for 3 making #1
B is 2 for 3 missing #2
C is 2 for 3 missing #3

Factor #2 is more important to me than factor #3 so my ranking is C, then B, D, and A

Details:
A: plush strings, European oboes - expressive orchestral playing - second movement tries to be too sad and its ending is prosaic - last movement lacks nobility - full rests observed at end (rank=4)
B: mood doesn't change quickly enough from phrase to phrase - lean strings - end of second movement is too serious - finale drags a bit during brass theme - great, noble climax at end - slows down with full rests at end - orchestra isn't top-notch - interpretation of conductor has idiosyncratic touches but has intensity and commitment (rank=2)
C: best sound of the group because of the higher volume - orchestra is alert and involved - second movement has a light touch - lean strings - nice throwaway ending for second movement - finale is accurate with all the right buttons pushed, lacks rhetorical gestures of B (rank=1)
D: lean strings, European oboes - end of second movement is too serious - brass is too recessed - tempo drags during brass theme (rank=3)


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

So it seems Karajan-likers prefer C (as I do) .


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

One of my favourite performances is the Karajan/Philharmonia *except* the very ending where IMO he just blasts through it, spoiling the effect.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

I've not revisited Karajan's Sibelius for a while but I've always liked his accounts. C is a little Karajanesque but HvK would never have lost the forward momentum. ;-) I think that's why that recording frustrates me. It could have been the best one.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

Merl said:


> I've not revisited Karajan's Sibelius for a while but I've always liked his accounts. C is a little Karajanesque but HvK would never have lost the forward momentum. ;-) I think that's why that recording frustrates me. It could have been the best one.


I like C the best, and in some spots it's superior, but I agree that Karajan's is better as a whole.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

Time to make the results official so that there can be open discussion about them.

I thought it would be interesting to only do live, non-commercial performances so C comes from Vimeo and the rest from YouTube. I almost included a Celibidache/Munich but then realized that it had been released by DGG.

A - Jukka-Pekka Saraste - Lahti Symphony
B - Lorin Maazel - Bavarian Radio Symphony
C - Santtu-Matias Rouvali - Gothenburg Symphony
D - Esa-Pekka Salonen - Swedish Radio Symphony

My thanks to everyone who took part.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Becca said:


> Time to make the results official so that there can be open discussion about them.
> 
> I thought it would be interesting to only do live, non-commercial performances so C comes from Vimeo and the rest from YouTube. I almost included a Celibidache/Munich but then realized that it had been released by DGG.
> 
> ...


It was interesting to compare Maazel's majestic reading with his 1960s commercial recording with the Vienna Philharmonic. The earlier performance is similar in many respects, but his conception has become more imaginative. The most significant change is in the tempo of the second movement, which in Vienna was rather quick. Maazel is now more patient, letting things build gradually, and I like hearing those dissonant long apoggiaturas in the winds held for maximum suspense. The entire last movement has also gained in breadth and intensity, especially the extremely powerful coda. I became acquainted with several of Maazel's VPO Sibelius recordings in the 1970s, and I still admire their strength and clarity.

Salonen made a studio recording with the Philharmonia which isn't as successful as this live one. It's slow and lacks momentum, but it's an interesting alternative view.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^ The other Maazel comparison is with his Pittsburgh which is closer in approach to this Bavarian one than to his earlier and more visceral Vienna recording but which seems turgid and dull compared to either. I wonder whether his Pittsburgh recordings were earlier or later than the Bavarian one used here?


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

A - Saraste - 2015
B - Maazel - 1993
C - Rouvali - 2017
D - Salonen - 2000


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

Becca said:


> One of my favourite performances is the Karajan/Philharmonia *except* the very ending where IMO he just blasts through it, spoiling the effect.


Shall we talk about Karajan's final cadence? His various versions are very different from other conductors'.

Philharmonia 52 (EMI) is quick, so are Berlin 65 (DG) and Berlin 76 (EMI).

Philharmonia 60 (EMI) feels even quicker, but it has got more bite in each individual chord (well, mostly the first one).

The most interesting is Berlin 57 Live (Sony, coupled with Glenn Gould's Beethoven Piano Concerto No. 3, a collector's item). Not only is it quick, it also sounds like he speeds up in the middle of the cadence!

I have not heard any other conductor who is as fast or deliberately played down (destroyed?) the very original sound effect of the final cadence like him. I wondered what he had in mind.


----------



## hustlefan (Apr 29, 2016)

I like how these blind comparisons highlight up-and-coming conductors such as Rouvalij in this one and Roth in the last one. I wonder if they would rate so highly if their names were already known before listening to them. Rouvali got excellent reviews in the latest issue of Fanfare for his Sibelius Symphony #1 on Alpha.


----------



## Lucio (Jan 5, 2020)

Woodduck said:


> It was interesting to compare Maazel's majestic reading with his 1960s commercial recording with the Vienna Philharmonic. The earlier performance is similar in many respects, but his conception has become more imaginative. The most significant change is in the tempo of the second movement, which in Vienna was rather quick. Maazel is now more patient, letting things build gradually, and I like hearing those dissonant long apoggiaturas in the winds held for maximum suspense. The entire last movement has also gained in breadth and intensity, especially the extremely powerful coda. I became acquainted with several of Maazel's VPO Sibelius recordings in the 1970s, and I still admire their strength and clarity.
> 
> Salonen made a studio recording with the Philharmonia which isn't as successful as this live one. It's slow and lacks momentum, but it's an interesting alternative view.


An unbeatable performance by Salonen with the Bavarian Radio Symphony Orchestra was available on YouTube until some time ago. His 2nd Symphony with the Vienna Philharmonic (still accessible on YouTube) is also unsurpassed. For the other symphonies there is only the Swedish Radio Orchestra version; it is not a world-class orchestra but a very young Salonen gets the best out of it. I think he is teh best in Sibelius, next to (i.e. on equal footing) Karajan.


----------



## Lucio (Jan 5, 2020)

An unbeatable performance by Salonen with the Bavarian Radio Symphony Orchestra was available on YouTube until some time ago. His 2nd Symphony with the Vienna Philharmonic (still accessible on YouTube) is also unsurpassed. For the other symphonies there is only the Swedish Radio Orchestra version; it is not a world-class orchestra but a very young Salonen gets the best out of it. I think he is teh best in Sibelius, next to (i.e. on equal footing) Karajan.


----------

