# Best Beethoven Symphony Recordings



## ryg

As a newcomer to this site can I ask your advice on the 'best' current CD recordings of the 9 Beethoven Symphonies, either individually or preferably as a set? Many thanks


----------



## Andreas

As far as recent releases go, I love the recordings by Paavo Järvi, Christian Thielemann and Kent Nagano. Järvi's Beethoven is lean and tight (played by a chamber orchestra), Thielemann's is grand and sensual, and Nagano is somewhere in between.

In terms of not quite so recent recordings, I love David Zinman's cycle from the 90s.


----------



## Bas

Frans Brüggen with his Orchestra of the 18th century released a box of all the Beethoven Symphonies recently. It is a live recording, but quite pristine, clean, coughs or any other noise is complete absent: first time I heard the applause I was kind of surprised, that was live?! Played on period instruments, as far as I am concerned in period tempi too. However, I am too less of an expert to be certain about the tempi, through. 

I think it is only available through the webshop of the orchestra if you are not from the Netherlands, but it is really worth it, sound is brilliant, playing outstanding. Not the kind of rushed tempi some conductors tend to use nowadays.


----------



## PlaySalieri

I go for the historical recordings - the best Beethoven 9 I have heard is Furtwangler's live performance from the 50s which is available on EMI. In fact I rate Furtwangler as the best for Beethoven. If you put recording qualiy above performance then obviously there are better versions. Karajan and Klemperer recorded probably their best verions of the 9 symphonies but in mono. Karajan's 1960s DG stereo cycle is fine.


----------



## neoshredder

Go for Gardiner's set.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

JOHN ELIOT GARDINER _YEEEEEEEEEAAAHHHH!!!!!_

Don't go for "historical recordings" like Furtwangler's or Karajan's, go for historically _informed_ recordings.


----------



## SixFootScowl

I am quite pleased with my recently acquired Gunter Wand Beethoven symphonies set, though I still rank Frenec Fricsay's Ninth as my favorite (of about 30 Ninths I have listened to). For the whole cycle I have not heard many sets, just Wand and Walter.
Gardiner's Third is very good too.


----------



## Vaneyes

For big 'n bold, BPO/HvK (DG, '62/3, '75-'77). For lean 'n lively, Deutsche Kammerphilharmonie Bremen/P.Jarvi (RCA, '06 - '08). :tiphat:


----------



## hpowders

Gunter Wand, North German Radio.


----------



## neoshredder

Gardiner set ftw!


----------



## shangoyal

My favourites:

1, 2 and 3 - Gardiner/Orchestre Revolutionnaire et Romantique

5 - Carlos Kleiber/VPO

6 - Karl Bohm/VPO

7 - Carlos Kleiber/VPO

8 - Karajan/BPO

9 - Barenboim/Berliner Staatskapelle (But, primarily because the slow movement is taken slow, around 19 minutes, the other movements are not necessarily that great, but still good)


----------



## bigshot

Wand, Bohm, Karajan 60s, Toscanini, Furtwangler, but most of all Kletzki / Czech PO. I discovered that set late in the game, after a couple dozen Beethoven symphony boxes. It's the best I've ever heard.


----------



## Guest

Well ryg, ya startin' to get the idea?

If you get Gardiner, then you'll be getting neoshredder's favorite. If you get Wand, you'll be getting hp's favorite. If you get Furtwangler's, then you'll be getting stomanek's favorite.

And so forth.

What you will not be getting, in any case, is "the best." No matter how many people you asked (and ask enough and you'll get a recommendation for every recording that's ever been made), you would not get "the best." 

There's no substitute for listening.

Listen.

(This is, just by the way, "the best" advice you will ever get about music.)


----------



## DavidA

1&2 Karajan 63
3 Karajan 77
4 Karajan 63
5&7 C Kleiber
Special mention of the Klemperer 7 (1957) and Toscanini (1936)
6 Klemperer or Karajan 77 (not 63)
8 Karajan 63
9 Karajan 77 - superb performance

Of course, many other excellent versions abound!


----------



## realdealblues

Depends on how you like your Beethoven...

If you want fast and lean chamber style Beethoven check out Paavo Jarvi.

If you want fast but with a full orchestra and some "oomph" to the sound check out Riccardo Chailly.

If you want a more "Traditional" Grand & Powerful approach check out:
Leonard Bernstein (Both of his sets are similar in style although I prefer New York for it's rough and energetic style, but his Vienna Philharmonic Cycle is also fine and the sound of the strings from the Vienna Philharmonic are beautiful)

George Szell or Gunter Wand or Paul Kletzki also fall under that category and are all excellent traditional choices.

Karajan's Beethoven is Karajan's but it's still beloved by many people. The 60's and 70's cycles are both considered classics.

If you're interested in more Germanic slower tempo but with massive and majestic sounds try Karl Bohm or Otto Klemperer.

All of the above are in good sound.

Gardiner has been mentioned but I personally find him unlistenable.

I would pick a Symphony you are familiar with, like the first movement of the 5th and then go to Spotify or Youtube and listen to some of these recordings. Find one that sounds "correct to YOU" and give that set a shot.

_*EDIT: And I just noticed this thread was from 2012. I assume ryg has long since bought a set of Beethoven Symphonies since he/she only had 1 post on this forum.*_


----------



## Itullian

Klemperer, Bohm, Bernstein imho.


----------



## hpowders

Florestan said:


> I am quite pleased with my recently acquired Gunter Wand Beethoven symphonies set, though I still rank Frenec Fricsay's Ninth as my favorite (of about 30 Ninths I have listened to). For the whole cycle I have not heard many sets, just Wand and Walter.
> Gardiner's Third is very good too.


I didn't see this before. Glad you like the Wand set. The weakness is in the singing of the 9th; not crucial to me, but I know it would bother you. Still to get symphonies 1-8 and movements 1-3 of the 9th in superior performances.......


----------



## Mister Man

Riccardo Muti and the Philadelphia Orchestra. It's the only one I find satisfactory.


----------



## Marschallin Blair

*Beethoven V, VI, & IX*

















For my 'Holy Trinity' of Beethoven symphonies-- that is to say: the Fifth, the Sixth, and the Ninth?-- It's unquestionably Karajan. . . the other symphonies have so much statistical variability in my taste of conductors that chosing just a couple of them becomes stochastic. Ha. Ha. Ha.


----------



## starry

You find what you like by comparing stuff and deciding for yourself, I know that takes work but if someone wants to get the most out of music that's what you have to put in. I wouldn't even presume to recommend something because I assume people are grownups who can decide for themselves, and it's not that difficult to hear lots of stuff on the internet.


----------



## hpowders

starry said:


> You find what you like by comparing stuff and deciding for yourself, I know that takes work but if someone wants to get the most out of music that's what you have to put in. I wouldn't even presume to recommend something because I assume people are grownups who can decide for themselves, and it's not that difficult to hear lots of stuff on the internet.


Of course what you say is true. I've subscribed to Fanfare for quite a while and most of the time when I purchase a CD based on a critic's review, I'm disappointed. I've learned to only take seriously one or two critics out of 25 or so whom I am simpatico with. The ideal way is to hear the performance before buying it.

Same deal with recommendations here. The best way to acquire classical music performances is to sample before you buy.

The best way to buy a set of the Beethoven symphonies is NOT to buy a complete set. No conductor is equally successful among all of the 9 symphonies.

I recommend sampling individual performances of each symphony, say Carlos Kleiber for the 5th and 7th, Leonard Bernstein/VPO for the 6th, Gunter Wand for the Eroica, Karajan 1977 for the 9th.
Much better than any one conductor's complete set.


----------



## SixFootScowl

hpowders said:


> I didn't see this before. Glad you like the Wand set. The weakness is in the singing of the 9th; not crucial to me, but I know it would bother you. Still to get symphonies 1-8 and movements 1-3 of the 9th in superior performances.......


Yep, but I have Fricsay's Ninth anyway. I was impressed with the Wand Eroica (1989 live recording) so ordered the whole cycle and found that Eroica is a 1985 recording, also very good. The beauty of it is that these symphonies are so wonderful that any decent performance is enjoyable. I was looking for a Fricsay cycle, but it appears he did not do all nine symphonies of Beethoven. Ah well, I should not start amassing collections of Beethoven symphonies anyway. I have two now, Wand and Walter, yet if the price is right I could not pass up another. My Wand was $17. My Walter was $5 (garage sale!).

My son got his Karajan cycle for $2 or so because the guy (different garage sale) had about 30 or so classical discs in a box and it was late Sunday so he wanted to get rid of stuff. We gave him $10 for the whole box as I recall. We were delighted when we went through the discs to find all nine of Beethoven's symphonies!


----------



## hpowders

Florestan said:


> Yep, but I have Fricsay's Ninth anyway. I was impressed with the Wand Eroica (1989 live recording) so ordered the whole cycle and found that Eroica is a 1985 recording, also very good. The beauty of it is that these symphonies are so wonderful that any decent performance is enjoyable. I was looking for a Fricsay cycle, but it appears he did not do all nine symphonies of Beethoven. Ah well, I should not start amassing collections of Beethoven symphonies anyway. I have two now, Wand and Walter, yet if the price is right I could not pass up another. My Wand was $17. My Walter was $5 (garage sale!).
> 
> My son got his Karajan cycle for $2 or so because the guy (different garage sale) had about 30 or so classical discs in a box and it was late Sunday so he wanted to get rid of stuff. We gave him $10 for the whole box as I recall. We were delighted when we went through the discs to find all nine of Beethoven's symphonies!


Sounds good! No pun intended.


----------



## DebussyDoesDallas

I second the votes for Paavo Jarvi. Lean, mean chamber orchestra--a bit bigger sounding than a pure HIP outfit but smaller than the big Bernstein and Karajan. The live DVD is nicely done too. Check out his 8th--my favorite because it's fast and fleet while still forceful. I hear the 8th as more Beethovenian Haydn than Haydnesque Beethoven, if you catch my drift.

For me, the value of asking fellow fans for their opinions is not so much to elicit simple "good" or "bad" judgments to heed, but to elicit descriptions, such HIP or big band, romantic-ish or classical-ish, traditional or idiosyncratic, continuo or no continuo, light or profound, recorded live or in the studio, and so on, especially from listeners more knowledgeable or perceptive than me.


----------



## SixFootScowl

This one is tempting. Recordings 1975 thru 1980. The 1980 Blomstedt Ninth is one of my favorite Ninths.


----------



## Blake

I'd recommend Barenboim's to any newcomer. The sound quality and execution is great… there's a rich, toasted oak aroma to the recording. Really nice.


----------



## Guest

Paavo Jarvi leading the Deutsche Kammerphilharmonie Bremen

These have the amazing clarity of newer recording techniques along with performances that rival the classics.


----------



## DavidA

realdealblues said:


> D
> 
> Karajan's Beethoven is Karajan's but it's still beloved by many people. The 60's and 70's cycles are both considered classics.
> 
> .[/B][/I]


Yes, but Klemperer's Beethoven is Klemperer's, Bernstein's is Bernstein's, Wand's is Wand's, etc, etc..


----------



## SixFootScowl

hpowders said:


> Gunter Wand, North German Radio.


I believe both of these are the North German Radio. I have the first of these.


----------



## SixFootScowl

hpowders said:


> I didn't see this before. Glad you like the Wand set. The weakness is in the singing of the 9th; not crucial to me, but I know it would bother you. Still to get symphonies 1-8 and movements 1-3 of the 9th in superior performances.......


I think that Szell's cycle has a very good Ninth, and will give all the satisfaction of the Wand set. I have both and won't give either one up.


----------



## hpowders

Florestan said:


> I think that Szell's cycle has a very good Ninth, and will give all the satisfaction of the Wand set. I have both and won't give either one up.


I don't usually take to Szell. I find him a bit "cold". All precision. Little warmth.


----------



## hpowders

Florestan said:


> I believe both of these are the North German Radio. I have the first of these.


His performance of Beethoven's Fourth Symphony is the finest I have ever heard.


----------



## SixFootScowl

hpowders said:


> I don't usually take to Szell. I find him a bit "cold". All precision. Little warmth.


Fair enough. I actually read somewhere that he was not the nicest fellow to work with. Here is a quote that suggests he is a bit cold and mechanical:



> George Szell ... minutely over-rehearsed, behaving as if he had taken Reiner's correspondence course in Orchestral Dictatorship. He once suggested to a Cleveland Orchestra violinist that he needed a better instrument. When the man protested that he could not afford one, Szell pointed out that he had a very nice car. That musician's days in the ensemble were numbered.


 Source.

That type of stuff put me of some but I do admit I like his cycle very much. I just don't feel equipped (ear, memory, etc) to sense the finer differences between cycles, so your and others' comments are always appreciated. Which reminds me, I think it was realdealblues who told me I should toss the Hanover Band cycle (he may be right).

Anyway, I just bought a Monteux set of symphonies 1,3,6,& 8. I already have 5 & 9. there is a set with 2,4,5,& 7 but it is a bit pricey--If I like 1,3,6,& 8 a lot, I may have to get the rest. Still, I keep leaving Bernstein in a lurch, first Immersel, now Monteux. In both cases the price was just about that of the Bernstein set.


----------



## SixFootScowl

realdealblues said:


> If you want a more "Traditional" Grand & Powerful approach check out:
> Leonard Bernstein (Both of his sets are similar in style although I prefer New York for it's rough and energetic style, but his Vienna Philharmonic Cycle is also fine and the sound of the strings from the Vienna Philharmonic are beautiful)


I keep feeling more and more that I will not be satisfied until I have the Bernstein cycle, preferably the New York set!


----------



## merlinus

The NYPO set has LOTS more energy, passion, and excitement. His VPO set is surprisingly tame. But for me Lenny never really got the 9th, like Fricsay.


----------



## SixFootScowl

merlinus said:


> The NYPO set has LOTS more energy, passion, and excitement. His VPO set is surprisingly tame. But for me Lenny never really got the 9th, like Fricsay.


Going to have to get that NYPO Lenny set. Yeah, Fricsay is the best Ninth. I do find Szell's Ninth a close second.


----------



## SixFootScowl

The bad news is I just received the same wrong disc (Kegal's Acoustica) that was sent back in December, both times instead of the Immerseel set, but this was a different seller supposedly, different name anyway. Return processing again. 

So, I give up on Immerseel. Who'd have thought you could get the whole cycle for $12 shipped anyway--am I cheap? :lol: So, what to do? To console myself, I should purchase the Lenny set with NYPO!  Same price, probably a better way for me to go as I already have a HIP original instruments set.

Did I mention that I just bought half a Monteux set last night (#1,3,6,&8)


----------



## Itullian

^^^So frustrating


----------



## hpowders

If you can tolerate the sound, Toscanini's cycle with the NBC Symphony from 1939 is tough to beat musically.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Florestan said:


> Did I mention that I just bought half a Monteux set last night (#1,3,6,&8)


The Monteux set is phenomenal! Like hearing Beethoven for the first time. It may become my top set!


----------



## AnotherSpin

Felix Weingartner?


----------



## DavidA

hpowders said:


> If you can tolerate the sound, Toscanini's cycle with the NBC Symphony from 1939 is tough to beat musically.


Yes but I can't tolerate the sound!


----------



## SixFootScowl

Andreas said:


> I love David Zinman's cycle from the 90s.


Yes. I think it is the ideal cycle (for me). Just received it the other day and am almost through my third listen and loving it. 









Also, grabbing an opportunity to bring another older Beethoven symphony up front. The more of these we have active, the more fun it gets.


----------



## Judith

I have Beethoven symphonies 4 and 7 performed by Academy of St Martin in the Fields conducted by Violinist Joshua Bell. Both of them are beautiful especially second movement on the 7th.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Judith said:


> I have Beethoven symphonies 4 and 7 performed by Academy of St Martin in the Fields conducted by Violinist Joshua Bell. Both of them are beautiful especially second movement on the 7th.


I have that one, but have not listened to it much. Should give it another try. Would Joshua be working towards a cycle perhaps?


----------



## CDs

Florestan said:


> Yes. I think it is the ideal cycle (for me). Just received it the other day and am almost through my third listen and loving it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, grabbing an opportunity to bring another older Beethoven symphony up front. The more of these we have active, the more fun it gets.


I have had this set for over a decade but haven't listened to it in years maybe I'll give it a listen this week.


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet

hpowders said:


> *His performance of Beethoven's Fourth Symphony is the finest I have ever heard*.


His being Gunter Wand.

I second this. I've heard around 20 or so with all the big names and the Wand stands out. If you don't have the set, at least do yourselves a favor and buy the single CD coupling the 4th and 5th.


----------



## maudia

I am choosing my favourite version for each symphony from this complete cycles: Chailly, Bernstein NYP and VPO, Karajan 60 and 70, Bruno Walter, Klemperer, Krivine, Wand, Toscanini, Gardiner, Harnoncourt and Jansons plus a few like Kleiber (5th), Bohm (6th), Haitink (4th and 8th) and so on.

My choices so far (the first one - and the other best)
#1 - Chailly + Bernstein VPO, Krivine, Norrington, Wand
#3 - Karajan 62 + Bernstein NYP, Klemperer, Toscanini, Krivine
#5 - Kleiber + Bernstein NYP, Gardiner, Karajan 62, Klemperer, Krivine, Wand (perhaps better than Kleiber)

Toscanini is fantastic but I think I would not return frequently to him because of the sound - but his Eroica is among the finalists.

Now listenning to the #6 versions...


----------



## SixFootScowl

maudia said:


> Toscanini is fantastic but I think I would not return frequently to him because of the sound - but his Eroica is among the finalists.


Yes, I am highly impressed by Toscanini. I have the 1949-1953 cycle and it has pretty fast tempos, which I like. It sounds great on earbud, but in the car it is clearly dated in sound technology.


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet

maudia said:


> I am choosing my favourite version for each symphony from this complete cycles: Chailly, Bernstein NYP and VPO, Karajan 60 and 70, Bruno Walter, Klemperer, Krivine, Wand, Toscanini, Gardiner, Harnoncourt and Jansons plus a few like Kleiber (5th), Bohm (6th), Haitink (4th and 8th) and so on.
> 
> My choices so far (the first one - and the other best)
> #1 - Chailly + Bernstein VPO, Krivine, Norrington, Wand
> #3 - Karajan 62 + Bernstein NYP, Klemperer, Toscanini, Krivine
> #5 - Kleiber + Bernstein NYP, Gardiner, Karajan 62, Klemperer, Krivine, *Wand (perhaps better than Kleiber)*
> 
> Toscanini is fantastic but I think I would not return frequently to him because of the sound - but his Eroica is among the finalists.
> 
> Now listenning to the #6 versions...


Yep, Wand's is the best 5th in my books.


----------



## maudia

I think the 6th Symphony is easier to conduct than the others. Probably because the program which is, in a certain way, a guide to the conducting. But mostly because it does not have some many changes in mood in the same movement - one of the most noticeable characteristics of Beethoven - lyrical, optimistic, fierce, angry (a bipolar composer :lol ...but not in the Pastoral.

But please to not consider these ideas too seriously (and forgive my English - sometimes it is difficult to choose the right words).

With this in mind - it is more difficult to choose the best versions of the Pastoral. Probably the list would change each time.

I like the HIP for the 6th (also for the first). Norrignton/LCP is my choice here. I added the David Zinman cycle to my auditions. The Zinman version is full of surprises. I will give more time to this version.

Harnoncourt (I did not think his 1st, 3rd or 5th are specials) is very good here. Perhaps the one I will explore more in the future.

The most acclaimed version - Karl Böhm - is like Klemperer - too slow sometimes - but what an orchestra !! 

Wand a bit too pompous. Karajan too unpersonal. Gardiner and Jansons could be in the final list. 

The final list: Bruno Walter + Bernstein/Wiener Philharmoniker (I love Bernstein - in Beethoven/Haydn/Mahler and Brahms), Karl Böhm, Harnoncourt, Norrington, Toscanin. Zinman to be explored.


----------



## Judith

Judith said:


> I have Beethoven symphonies 4 and 7 performed by Academy of St Martin in the Fields conducted by Violinist Joshua Bell. Both of them are beautiful especially second movement on the 7th.


I do know that Joshua sometimes conducts from the violin as Musical Director of Academy of St Martin in the Fields.


----------



## Judith

Florestan said:


> I have that one, but have not listened to it much. Should give it another try. Would Joshua be working towards a cycle perhaps?


Joshua sometimes directs with the bow as he is Musical Director of Academy of St Martin in the Fields.


----------



## Manxfeeder

maudia said:


> Toscanini is fantastic but I think I would not return frequently to him because of the sound - but his Eroica is among the finalists.


If you ever get the chance, his recording from October 28, 1939, is worth hearing for its intensity. Of course, after you adjust to the sound.


----------



## KenOC

Noted in another forum: A Toscanini Eroica from 1949, in stereo!


----------



## Manxfeeder

KenOC said:


> Noted in another forum: A Toscanini Eroica from 1949, in stereo!


Woo-hoo! I'm there!


----------



## Merl

This would be my current Beethoven symphony cycle at the moment but it changes on a daily basis and I have so many I'm spoiled for choice

1. Hogwood
2. Immerseel
3. Karajan 80s (yeah I know it's a weird recording but it's a great performance)
4. Szell
5. Honeck
6. Ashkenazy
7. Fischer
8. Tremblay
9. Leinsdorf

These have all had an outing this week


----------



## Pugg

Judith said:


> I have Beethoven symphonies 4 and 7 performed by Academy of St Martin in the Fields conducted by Violinist Joshua Bell. Both of them are beautiful especially second movement on the 7th.


He did a pretty good job , but it's not going to be " Immortal "


----------



## DavidA

maudia said:


> *I think the 6th Symphony is easier to conduct than the others. *Probably because the program which is, in a certain way, a guide to the conducting. But mostly because it does not have some many changes in mood in the same movement - one of the most noticeable characteristics of Beethoven - lyrical, optimistic, fierce, angry (a bipolar composer :lol ...but not in the Pastoral.
> 
> But please to not consider these ideas too seriously (and forgive my English - sometimes it is difficult to choose the right words).
> 
> With this in mind - it is more difficult to choose the best versions of the Pastoral. Probably the list would change each time.
> 
> I like the HIP for the 6th (also for the first). Norrignton/LCP is my choice here. I added the David Zinman cycle to my auditions. The Zinman version is full of surprises. I will give more time to this version.
> 
> Harnoncourt (I did not think his 1st, 3rd or 5th are specials) is very good here. Perhaps the one I will explore more in the future.
> 
> The most acclaimed version - Karl Böhm - is like Klemperer - too slow sometimes - but what an orchestra !!
> 
> Wand a bit too pompous. Karajan too unpersonal. Gardiner and Jansons could be in the final list.
> 
> The final list: Bruno Walter + Bernstein/Wiener Philharmoniker (I love Bernstein - in Beethoven/Haydn/Mahler and Brahms), Karl Böhm, Harnoncourt, Norrington, Toscanin. Zinman to be explored.


I've never heard that before. Are you a conductor then?

The best versions of the 6th I have:

Bohm - I heard glowing reviews but when I listened it all seems a bit foursquare. I'll listen again though.
Karajan - avoid the 63 but the 77 is absolutely glowing. Wonderful fresh performance.
Chailly and Norrington rush the whole thing - not recommended. They appear to be driven by the metronome not musical considerations.
Klemperer is super if you like slow tempi and a really plodding scherzo. But he has a lot of good things to say.
Beecham - I have a recording from early 1950s which is wonderful though of course in limited sound. But hear the wind contributions from the likes of Brain and Brymer!
Toscanini is in limited sound and I don't think shows the great man at his best.
Harnoncourt is curiously idiosyncratic. Not as good as the others I think.


----------



## Merl

Gardiner's 6th nearly made it in for me but I've had that Ashkenazy version for years and rarely played it. When I put it on the other day I was really impressed with it. It's a light reading but really well-sprung rhythms and a very 'jolly' account. Perfect 'sunny day in Scotland' version.


----------



## Merl

Florestan, I've just downloaded and listened to Fricsay's account of Beethoven's 9th with the BPO and I've gotta say that you are spot on - it is something special. The 2nd movement bounces along at a lovely steady pace and the finale is just excellent. Very, very reminiscent of Karajan's 1962 9th (another fave of mine). In fact the two are so similar, in parts, I actually thought I was listening to Karajan, occasionally, but that's partly due to the BPO's superb playing (they really were a brilliant orchestra back then). The Egmont is similarly superb. Thank you for the recommendation.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Merl said:


> Florestan, I've just downloaded and listened to Fricsay's account of Beethoven's 9th with the BPO and I've gotta say that you are spot on - it is something special. The 2nd movement bounces along at a lovely steady pace and the finale is just excellent. Very, very reminiscent of Karajan's 1962 9th (another fave of mine). In fact the two are so similar, in parts, I actually thought I was listening to Karajan, occasionally, but that's partly due to the BPO's superb playing (they really were a brilliant orchestra back then). The Egmont is similarly superb. Thank you for the recommendation.


You are welcome. That was my very first Ninth back about 35 years ago. I still have the vinyl copy, the one that splits the slow movement between two sides.


----------



## Merl

Incidentally I also grabbed a few of Ferencsik's accounts late last night. They're decent but a don't quite get to the level of Chailly, Hogwood, HvK, Mackerras and co. Some nice touches and good playing, though, but the 9th I listened to (I always start with the 9th or 7th - my two favourites) was a bit lacking in something. I just picked up Weller's complete set last week, with the CBSO, and that similarly just misses greatness but is consistently well-played and realised and only cost me £4. Pletnev and Tremblay are similar in that they are NEARLY there and at times nail it. Nearly all of the Tremblay set is very good and his speeds sound bang-on (his 4th and 8th are excellent). The Tremblay set is growing on me a lot, tbh.


----------



## DavidA

I'm just listening to Beecham conducting the 4th symphony with the LPO in 1945. it is absolutely terrific with much Beethovenian fire and great playing from the orchestra. the sound is, of course, limited but reasonable. If you can find a copy the Biddulph transfers are by Mark Obert-Thorn.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Merl said:


> Incidentally I also grabbed a few of Ferencsik's accounts late last night. They're decent but a don't quite get to the level of Chailly, Hogwood, HvK, Mackerras and co.


Nope. Probably a couple levels below that. Probably among the level of Edlinger. I got my set because it was cheap, and he is Hungarian and since I could not have a full set of Fricsay (there are only 6 Beethoven symphonies recorded by Fricsay), I thought it would be nice to have--not that Ferencsik is anywhere near Fricsay, but sometimes we just do things for odd reasons.


----------



## bioluminescentsquid

My favorite:








Frans Bruggen's live performances with Orchestra of the 18th century in Rotterdam, 2011.

It's an excellent HIP performance, with warm strings and none of the edginess or harshness commonly associated with HIP recordings- only clean and elegant lines here. Tempos are lively and very well chosen, and the performance really hearkens back to Beethoven as a classicist composer. Yet it is at the same time emotionally moving to listen to these symphonies under the Master's hand.

One complaint - it's a live performance in a concert hall, not a studio performance, so I've heard complaints about the recording quality itself. I personally don't think it's a problem at all.


----------



## Oldhoosierdude

OK. I don't want to start a new thread. Here's a question that I know many of you can answer. 

In the 21st century what modern instrument recordings have there been of the Beethoven Cycle? And are they any good? 

Mackerras? I don't know if he used period instruments or not.


----------



## KenOC

Best I know of (and it's very good indeed) is Haitink with the London SO from 2006. Great price, too.










Chailly is excellent as well, from 2011.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Oops, sorry. Missed the criteria of 21st century and am pretty sure Zinman is late 20th century. Still a good cycle though.

This is my favorite cycle and uses modern instruments with a historic reading and faster tempos.









Same set in bargain box includes piano concertos some overtures and the Choral Fantasy:


----------



## Johnnie Burgess

Florestan said:


> This is my favorite cycle and uses modern instruments with a historic reading and faster tempos.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Same set in bargain box includes piano concertos some overtures and the Choral Fantasy:


I think he takes the 9th too fast.


----------



## SixFootScowl

Johnnie Burgess said:


> I think he takes the 9th too fast.


I definitely would not make it your only Ninth. But if you think the Ninth is fast, you should hear him speed through the Missa Solemnis.


----------



## KenOC

Merl said:


> Florestan, I've just downloaded and listened to Fricsay's account of Beethoven's 9th with the BPO and I've gotta say that you are spot on - it is something special.


My all-time favorite 9th!

BTW the Zinman is fudging a bit, not quite 21st-century.


----------



## Johnnie Burgess

I am not saying it was bad. I think he offers something different. I think his version was better than Gardiner's.


----------



## SixFootScowl

KenOC said:


> BTW the Zinman is fudging a bit, not quite 21st-century.


How close am I? Says copyright 1999 on the back of my set, but probably spanned a few years through 1999.


----------



## KenOC

Florestan said:


> How close am I? Says copyright 1999 on the back of my set, but probably spanned a few years through 1999.


As Groucho says, "Close but no cigar!"


----------



## Tallisman

Wanted to revive this just to put out a vote for George Szell. His 9th is bone-shakingly formidable and the rest are seriously impressive too.


----------



## Holden4th

Some of these choices could change and others are set in stone

1 Immerseel Anima Eterna
2 Reiner Pittsburgh
3 Toscanini 1949 or Leibovitz
4 Walter Col SO
5 Karajan 1963
6 Cluytens BPO
7 Monteux LSO
8 Katsaris solo piano
9 Fricsay BPO


----------



## andrzejmakal

Roger Norrington/London Classical Players


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Seeing as how comparisons of Beethoven recordings have creeped their way into other threads, I thought I would resurrect this one. These are my choices for Beethoven recordings after many hours of listening over the past decades.

♫ = all time great recording
◄ = top choice for combination of performance and good sound quality

*Symphony No. 1*

Wilhelm Furtwängler (11/29/52) (Orfeo, Tahra, Music & Arts, Andromeda)
Eugen Jochum (DG) ◄
Sir John Barbirolli (PRT, Dutton)
Leonard Bernstein (DG)

Additional listening: Wilhelm Furtwängler (EMI, Naxos), Bruno Walter (Arbiter), Felix Weingartner (Naxos, Opus), Leonard Bernstein (Sony), Herbert von Karajan (1977) (DG), Eugen Jochum (Philips), Karl Böhm (DG), Herman Scherchen (MCA, Tahra), Otto Klemperer (EMI), Bruno Walter (Sony), Herbert von Karajan (EMI), Sir Neville Marriner (Pentatone, Philips), Andre Cluytens (EMI, Royal Classics), Herbert von Karajan (1962) (DG), Hans Schmidt-Isserstedt (Decca), Paul Kletzki (Suppraphon)

*Symphony No. 2*

Wilhelm Furtwängler (EMI, Music & Arts, Andromeda)
Sir Thomas Beecham (EMI)
Eugen Jochum (DG) ◄
Andre Cluytens (EMI, Royal Classics)

Additional listening: Sir Thomas Beecham (BBC), Sir Thomas Beecham (1937) (Beecham Collection), Felix Weingartner (Naxos, Opus, EMI), Erich Kleiber (Dutton, Teldec, Naxos), Clemens Krauss (Preiser), Karl Böhm (DG), Eugene Ormandy (Sony), Otto Klemperer (1957) (Testament), Otto Klemperer (EMI), Erich Leinsdorf (RCA), Herbert von Karajan (1962) (DG), Herbert von Karajan (1977) (DG), Eduard Van Beinum (Decca), Leonard Bernstein (Sony), Roger Norrington (EMI), Franz Konwitschny (Berlin Classics), Leonard Bernstein (DG), Eugen Jochum (Philips), Bruno Walter (Sony), Paul Kletzki (Suppraphon), Hans Schmidt-Isserstedt (Decca), Rafael Kubelik (Audite), Sir Neville Marriner (Pentatone, Philips)

*Symphony No. 3*

Wilhelm Furtwängler (1944) (Tahra, Orfeo, Music & Arts, Preiser, Andromeda) ♫
Wilhelm Furtwängler (12/8/1952) (Tahra, Music & Arts, Andromeda)
Otto Klemperer (1957) (Testament)
Otto Klemperer (1959) (EMI) ◄
Arturo Toscanini (1939) (RCA, Music & Arts, Naxos)
Sir John Barbirolli (Warner, Dutton)
Herbert von Karajan (1984) (DG)
Erich Kleiber (1950) (Decca)

Additional listening: Wilhelm Furtwängler (1953) (EMI Great Conductors), Wilhelm Furtwängler (1952) (EMI), Paul van Kempen (Philips), Otto Klemperer (1955), Rudolf Kempe (1961) (Testament), Karl Böhm (1961) (DG), Hans Pfitzner (Preiser, Naxos), Felix Weingartner (Naxos, Opus), Erich Kleiber (1955) (Decca), Bruno Walter (1941) (Dante Lys), Herbert von Karajan (1962) (DG), Colin Davis (Philips), William Steinberg (EMI, XXI), Eugen Jochum (DG), Karl Böhm (1972) (DG), Bruno Walter (Sony), Leonard Bernstein (Sony), Eugene Ormandy (Sony), Hans Schmidt-Isserstedt (Decca), Andre Cluytens (EMI, Royal Classics), Carl Schuricht (DG, Profil, Dante Lys), Evgeny Mravinsky (Classical Masters), Hermann Scherchen (1958) (MCA, Westminster), Nikolaus Harnoncourt (Elatus, Teldec), Eugen Jochum (Philips), Pierre Monteux (Decca), George Szell (Sony), Carlo Maria Giulini (DG)

*Symphony No. 4*

Wilhelm Furtwängler (1943) (DG, Music & Arts, Andromeda) ♫
Otto Klemperer (1957) (Testament BBC)
Herbert von Karajan (1962) (DG) ◄
Bruno Walter (Sony)

Additional listening: Sir Thomas Beecham (Biddulph), Otto Klemperer (EMI), Karl Böhm (Orfeo), Karl Böhm (DG), Carlos Kleiber (Orfeo), Herbert von Karajan (1977) (DG), William Steinberg (EMI, XXI), Leonard Bernstein (DG), Hans Schmidt-Isserstedt (Decca), Andre Cluytens (EMI, Royal Classics), Eugen Jochum (Philips)

*Symphony No. 5 *

Wilhelm Furtwängler (5/25/1947) (Tahra, Audite, Music & Arts) ♫
Wilhelm Furtwängler (1943) (DG, Tahra, Opus, Music & Arts, Andromeda)
Wilhelm Furtwängler (5/23/1954) (Tahra, Audite, Music & Arts, Andromeda)
Eugen Jochum (1951) (Tahra)
Arturo Toscanini (1933) (Naxos, RCA, Music & Arts, Pearl)
Otto Klemperer (1957) (Testament BBC)
Leonard Bernstein (1976 Amnesty International Concert) (DG) ◄
Erich Kleiber (Decca)
Carlos Kleiber (DG)
Carlo Maria Giulini (DG)

Additional listening: Wilhelm Furtwängler (1944) (EMI Great Conductors), Wilhelm Furtwängler (5/27/1947) (DG), Wilhelm Furtwängler (1937) (Tahra, Biddulph, Naxos, Music & Arts), Karl Böhm (1953) (DG), Victor de Sabata (1950) (Tahra, Urania), Artur Nikisch (Dutton, DG, Symposium), Wilhelm Furtwängler (1954) (EMI), Herbert von Karajan (1962) (DG), Otto Klemperer (1955) (EMI, Naxos), Pierre Monteux (Decca), Evgeny Mravinsky (1972) (Erato, Elatus), Franz Schalk (Dante Lys), Andre Cluytens (EMI, Royal Classics), Bruno Walter (1958) (Sony), George Szell (1969) (Orfeo), Leonard Bernstein (Sony), Rafael Kubelik (DG), Sir John Barbirolli (Dutton), Herbert von Karajan (1976) (DG), Serge Koussevitzky (EMI Great Conductors), Leonard Bernstein (1977) (DG)

*Symphony No. 6 *

Wilhelm Furtwängler (5/23/1954) (Tahra, Audite, Music & Arts, Andromeda) ♫
Wilhelm Furtwängler (5/25/1947) (Tahra, Audite, Music & Arts)
Bruno Walter (1958) (Sony) ◄
Otto Klemperer (1957) (EMI)
Karl Böhm (DG)
Andre Cluytens (Royal Classics, EMI)

Additional listening: Wilhelm Furtwängler (1944) (Tahra, Music & Arts, Andromeda), Wilhelm Furtwängler (EMI), Victor de Sabata (Naxos), Erich Kleiber (Dutton, EMI Great Conductors), Felix Weingartner (1927) (Naxos, Opus), Leonard Bernstein (DG), William Steinberg (EMI, XXI), Hans Pfitzner (Preiser, Naxos), Pablo Casals (Sony), Pierre Monteux (Decca), Rafael Kubelik (Audite), Leopold Stokowski (Cala), Arturo Toscanini (1937) (EMI, Naxos, Arkadia), Hermann Scherchen (1958) (MCA, Westminster), Wolfgang Sawallisch (EMI), Fritz Reiner (1955) (RCA), Vladimir Ashkenazy (Decca)

*Symphony No. 7 *

Wilhelm Furtwängler (1953) (DG, Tahra, Music & Arts, Andromeda) ♫
Wilhelm Furtwängler (1943) (Music & Arts, Tahra, DG, Andromeda)
Arturo Toscanini (1936) (Naxos, RCA, Pearl)
Otto Klemperer (1957 Testament)
Carlos Kleiber (Orfeo)
Karl Böhm (DG) ◄
Sir Colin Davis (EMI)

Additional listening: Wilhelm Furtwängler (1950) (EMI), Otto Klemperer (1955) (EMI), Felix Weingartner (Naxos, Opus), Karl Böhm (1958) (DG), Paul van Kempen (Philips), Leonard Bernstein (DG), Carlos Kleiber (DG), Sir Thomas Beecham (EMI), Hans Schmidt-Isserstedt (Decca), Leopold Stokowski (1927) (Biddulph), Herbert von Karajan (1963) (DG), Bruno Walter (Sony), Leonard Bernstein (1963) (Sony), Pierre Monteux (Decca), Andre Cluytens (EMI, Royal Classics), Pablo Casals (Sony), William Steinberg (EMI, XXI), Herbert von Karajan (1977) (DG)

*Symphony No. 8*

Wilhelm Furtwängler (1953) (DG, Tahra, Music & Arts, Andromeda) ♫
Herbert von Karajan (1962) (DG) ◄
Karl Böhm (DG)
Sir John Barbirolli (PRT, Dutton)

Additional listening: Hans Pfitzner (Preiser, Naxos), Paul van Kempen (Philips), Herbert von Karajan (1983) (DG), Bruno Walter (Sony), Pablo Casals (Sony), Eugen Jochum (Philips), Sir Thomas Beecham (Sony, EMI), Felix Weingartner (Naxos, Opus), Leonard Bernstein (DG), Roger Norrington (EMI)

*Symphony No. 9*

Wilhelm Furtwängler (3/22/42) (Tahra, Music & Arts, Archipel, Andromeda) ♫
Wilhelm Furtwängler (7/29/51) (Tahra, Orfeo, EMI) ♫
Wilhelm Furtwängler (8/22/54) (Audite, Tahra, Music & Arts, Andromeda)
Otto Klemperer (1961) (Testament BBC)
Otto Klemperer (1957) (Testament)
Ferenc Fricsay (DG) ◄
Leonard Bernstein (1979) (DG)
Karl Böhm (1972) (DG)
Herbert von Karajan (1976) (DG)
Leonard Bernstein (1989) (DG)
Georg Solti (1972) (Decca)

Additional listening: Andre Cluytens (EMI, Royal Classics), Bruno Walter (1955) (Orfeo), Arturo Toscanini (1938) (Music & Arts, ATRA), Hermann Abendroth (12/31/50, RSOB) (Tahra, Urania), Carl Schuricht (1959) (Testament), Herbert von Karajan (1962) (DG), Felix Weingartner (1935) (Opus, Naxos, Avid), Rafael Kubelik (Orfeo), Rafael Kubelik (DG), Fritz Reiner (RCA), Willem Mengelberg (Philips, NM Classics, Classica d'Oro), Fritz Busch (DG, Guild, Arlecchino), Hans Schmidt-Isserstedt (Decca), Otto Klemperer (1957) (EMI), Eugen Jochum (Philips), Erich Leinsdorf (RCA), Charles Munch (RCA, EMI Great Conductors), Christoph von Dohnanyi (Telarc), Leopold Stokowski (1967) (Decca), Charles Mackerras (EMI, Classics for Pleasure), John Eliot Gardiner (DG Archiv)


----------



## DavidA

KenOC said:


> Best I know of (and it's very good indeed) is Haitink with the London SO from 2006. Great price, too.
> 
> Chailly is excellent as well, from 2011.


I have the Chailly and had really high hopes of it but I just can't get on with it. It just seems far too fast to the point of being rushed in spite of the brilliant playing


----------



## MatthewWeflen

Thought I would chime in with a vote for Karajan 1977. Brisk but not hurry-sick tempo, excellent sonics. There is a new Dolby Atmos Blu-Ray Audio disc that came out which is very reasonably priced. I ripped the 192k/24b hi-res stereo track from it on my PC Blu-Ray drive, encoded it to hi-res FLAC, and listen to it on my headphones. Sublime.


----------



## DavidA

MatthewWeflen said:


> Thought I would chime in with a vote for Karajan 1977. Brisk but not hurry-sick tempo, excellent sonics. There is a new Dolby Atmos Blu-Ray Audio disc that came out which is very reasonably priced. I ripped the 192k/24b hi-res stereo track from it on my PC Blu-Ray drive, encoded it to hi-res FLAC, and listen to it on my headphones. Sublime.
> 
> View attachment 112709


A combination of the 1963 and 1977 ones is unbeatable.


----------



## MatthewWeflen

DavidA said:


> A combination of the 1963 and 1977 ones is unbeatable.


Also available in Hi-Res Blu-Ray audio ;-)


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Heck148 said:


> Reiner's LvB 9 builds so perfectly, the finale is simply non pareil....the execution, and the balance between 5he main elements - orchestra, soloists, chorus - is remarkable...the orchestra playing is phenomenal, they just nail everything....the big choral/orchestra sections are thrilling, with amazing clarity...Reiner always had a keen sense of the drama - the ups, downs, climaxes, respites....this talent is abundantly evident....Toscanini and Solti had this sense, also, and their recordings are very good, but Reiner sorts it out, and puts it back together better than anyone else I've heard.


Clarity, execution, balance...sure, this is what you get with Reiner, Toscanini, Solti, and Szell. But Beethoven is about freedom, drama, and passion. It feels at times as if it is about to come apart at the seams. He is not about coloring within the lines. That is Haydn.

Listen for example to the passage between the 9 and 11 minute mark of Furtwangler's '42 9th. It is cataclysmic. This is what Beethoven demands. No performance can ever fully realize the potential of his music. It is boundless, not contained.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DavidA said:


> A combination of the 1963 and 1977 ones is unbeatable.


In my list above I include the 1962 4th and 8th as primary recommendations for combination of performance and sound. I believe Karajan's interpretation suited these symphonies very well. They are even packaged together by DG if you can find it:










I also included HvK's 1984 Eroica and 1976 9th among my primary recommendations of those works.

In terms of complete sets, and you can see my opinion reflected in my individual lists above, the most consistent stereo cycle is Bohm's. I rate his versions of 6 thru 9 among my primary recommendations and 1 thru 4 among additional recommendations. Only No. 5 really fails due to being too ponderous (though his mono 1953 version is wonderful).


----------



## MatthewWeflen

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Clarity, execution, balance...sure, this is what you get with Reiner, Toscanini, Solti, and Szell. But Beethoven is about freedom, drama, and passion. It feels at times as if it is about to come apart at the seams. He is not about coloring within the lines. That is Haydn.
> 
> Listen for example to the passage between the 9 and 11 minute mark of Furtwangler's '42 9th. It is cataclysmic. This is what Beethoven demands. No performance can ever fully realize the potential of his music. It is boundless, not contained.


Love the tympani in this one. Pity about the sound quality overall.


----------



## DavidA

MatthewWeflen said:


> Also available in Hi-Res Blu-Ray audio ;-)


Yes I reckon 1963 with additions of

1977 (or 1955) no 6
1977 no 9 which is the best on disc IMO.
Also a superb Eroica from 1982
They were absolutely superbly recorded in 1963 - it was revolutionary. When they came out it was a huge gamble as no-one apart from Karajan thought it would make money. But with hood publicity it flew off the shelves as people realised its quality. It set the standard for the 60s as Toscanini did in the 50s. There is a tremendous sense of discovery and drive and energy. I can remember the excitement they caused.


----------



## DavidA

Tallisman said:


> Wanted to revive this just to put out a vote for George Szell. His 9th is bone-shakingly formidable and the rest are seriously impressive too.


I know there s a problem with the soprano going out of tune in the finale. I wonder Szell's didn't have it recorded again


----------



## Heck148

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Clarity, execution, balance...sure, this is what you get with Reiner, Toscanini, Solti, and Szell. But Beethoven is about freedom, drama, and passion. It feels at times as if it is about to come apart at the seams. He is not about coloring within the lines. That is Haydn.
> 
> Listen for example to the passage between the 9 and 11 minute mark of Furtwangler's '42 9th. It is cataclysmic. This is what Beethoven demands. No performance can ever fully realize the potential of his music. It is boundless, not contained.


with Furtwangler, all too often it does come apart at the seams!! to me, that is not "dramatic", powerful, convincing....it's sloppy. badly executed...
Plenty of drama with Reiner, Toscanini, Solti, definitely not contained between the lines, either...also, not strewn all over the page in rhythmic disarray. 
try the full orchestral tutti of the "Ode to Joy" theme....amazing, Reiner let's the CSO go full throttle....really thrilling....nothing like it!! great spot, and just one of many.


----------



## NLAdriaan

Likely already mentioned before, but I am a great admirer of Carlos Kleiber and he has recorded a beautiful 4, 5, 6 and 7 th Beethoven of which 4 and 6 are live recordings. 

The 5th and 7th in his reading with the VPO (7th also with Concertgebouw Orchestra on DVD) are IMO the best on the market.

Such a shame he didn't record more music, such as Mahler and Bruckner.


----------



## DavidA

Heck148 said:


> Plenty of drama with Reiner, Toscanini, Solti, definitely not contained between the lines, either...also, not strewn all over the page in rhythmic disarray.
> try the full orchestral tutti of the "Ode to Joy" theme....amazing, Reiner let's the CSO go full throttle....really thrilling....nothing like it!! great spot, and just one of many.


Funny. I have the Reiner recording and didn't consider it that remarkable. Was not 'full throttle' but rather contained.


----------



## DavidA

NLAdriaan said:


> Likely already mentioned before, but I am a great admirer of Carlos Kleiber and he has recorded a beautiful 4, 5, 6 and 7 th Beethoven of which 4 and 6 are live recordings.
> 
> The 5th and 7th in his reading with the VPO (7th also with Concertgebouw Orchestra on DVD) are IMO the best on the market.
> 
> Such a shame he didn't record more music, such as Mahler and Bruckner.


The 5 and 7 are great recordings. Let's face it, Kleiber was highly talented but pretty idle. Only conducted when the freezer was empty.


----------



## KenOC

DavidA said:


> The 5 and 7 are great recordings. Let's face it, Kleiber was highly talented but pretty idle. Only conducted when the freezer was empty.


I've read that Kleiber had a problem with debilitating stage fright, thus his reluctance to conduct.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DavidA said:


> Funny. I have the Reiner recording and didn't consider it that remarkable. Was not 'full throttle' but rather contained.


That's what I hear as well, and I just had it on yesterday after listening to Furtwängler, Fricsay, Bernstein, Klemperer, Karajan, Solti, and Böhm.

Böhm '72 would be higher on my list if he had not slowed down the tempo so much over the last half of the choral movement. It bogs down what is otherwise one of the most powerful readings on the market.

I was a latecomer to Fricsay, but I now agree with many others that it is the most exciting stereo account.

Bernstein/VPO is also excellent even though the soprano soloist is a letdown.

But the live Furtwänglers and Klemperers offer the best realizations of the 9th on record.


----------



## DavidA

KenOC said:


> I've read that Kleiber had a problem with debilitating stage fright, thus his reluctance to conduct.


When we consider Kleiber's personality we are considering the imponderable. When a man can walk out of a recording because a member of the orchestra has said something he doesn't like, then it is most unprofessional.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Heck148 said:


> with Furtwangler, all too often it does come apart at the seams!! to me, that is not "dramatic", powerful, convincing....it's sloppy. badly executed...


One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.


----------



## Heck148

DavidA said:


> Funny. I have the Reiner recording and didn't consider it that remarkable. Was not 'full throttle' but rather contained.


you're kidding, if course....


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Best complete cycles:

Böhm - good to great in every symphony except No. 5
Karajan '63 - consistently good across the board if not spectacular, only slight letdown is No. 6
Karajan '77 - solid to good, except in No. 3 (which can be supplemented with the excellent digital one)
Bernstein/VPO (DG) - good in all except Nos. 3 & 5
Cluytens - solid readings
Klemperer stereo - great in Nos. 3 and 6, but variable in the rest
Walter - solid to great in all except No. 9, better in lighter symphonies
Jochum (Philips) - mostly solid, especially in the lighter symphonies, but lacking drama
Schmidt-Isserstedt - mostly solid, except No. 5


----------



## Heck148

Hey, guys, I'm not going to get into throwing mud on someone else's sacred cow....for me, Reiner owns LvB #9, and I could post from now til doomsday on it many glorious attributes.....
for others, Furtwangler, HvK, Klemperer may float your boat....great....enjoy, to each his own.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Heck148 said:


> Hey, guys, I'm not going to get into throwing mud on someone else's sacred cow....for me, Reiner owns LvB #9, and I could post from now til doomsday on it many glorious attributes.....
> for others, Furtwangler, HvK, Klemperer may float your boat....great....enjoy, to each his own.


Throw all the mud you want, and feel free to wax philosophical on the Reiner. Maybe someday I will agree. Yesterday's hearing just was not that day.


----------



## NLAdriaan

DavidA said:


> When we consider Kleiber's personality we are considering the imponderable. When a man can walk out of a recording because a member of the orchestra has said something he doesn't like, then it is most unprofessional.


This incident happened with a horn player and in the presence of Sviatoslav Richter, who fully supported Kleiber as he found it unheard of that a member of the orchestra would be so brutal against a director.

So, who is unprofessional in this story?

Kleiber remains the most sheer musical of directors, if you watch his few rehearsal video's, if you watch his Carmen ouverture on DVD.

The greatest artists have forms of stage fright and you might even say that the most talented artists maybe even are unkown to us, as they don't perform for others.

As I see it, Carlos Kleiber was likely an ultra perfectionist and just could not accept imperfections. This seems somewhat difficult if you are dependent on so many others to deliver your sound.

Well, whatever it was, it remains a shame that we don't have more legacy of this incredible musical talent. Otto Schenk, who directed many of Kleibers opera performances, said he had been angry at Kleiber for not creating more music to the world.


----------



## Heck148

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Throw all the mud you want, and feel free to wax philosophical on the Reiner. Maybe someday I will agree. Yesterday's hearing just was not that day.


I know some people attach esoteric, metaphysical concepts to music that they hear...an overall "spiritual" idea that overlays the music itself...that is fine, and if it increases, enhances one's enjoyment, great!!

I don't do that myself, as a rule....I tend to react pretty much to the sound itself, being produced. perhaps Toscanini explains it best in his famous quote:

regarding the First mvt of Beethoven Symphony "Eroica" -

"_To some it is Napoleon, to some it is a philosophical struggle, to me it is allegro con brio._"
Arturo Toscanini


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Heck148 said:


> I know some people attach esoteric, metaphysical concepts to music that they hear...an overall "spiritual" idea that overlays the music itself...that is fine, and if it increases, enhances one's enjoyment, great!!
> 
> I don't do that myself, as a rule....I tend to react pretty much to the sound itself, being produced. perhaps Toscanini explains it best in his famous quote:
> 
> regarding the First mvt of Beethoven Symphony "Eroica" -
> 
> "_To some it is Napoleon, to some it is a philosophical struggle, to me it is allegro con brio._"
> Arturo Toscanini


I was going to dig up that same exact quote! Yes, that demonstrates the difference. I don't even know if I need to attach a particular word to describe a piece, but I go for performances that capture the inner meaning. I do not go for performances which are simply clinically reproducing the written score.

As I stated elsewhere, when I sang Bach's "Ich habe genug" last year, I got a wonderful compliment from the concertmaster, who said the way I used a different color for each movement brought him to tears. That is not something you can do if constricted by Toscanini's quote.

It was not something I did consciously. I am always thinking in terms of meaning first, printed score second.


----------



## Heck148

Brahmsianhorn said:


> I go for performances that capture the inner meaning.


that pre-assumes that their is such an "inner meaning". 



> I do not go for performances which are simply clinically reproducing the written score.


same here, I've no interest in "clinically" produced performances....had enough of that with Leinsdorf!!



> I used a different color for each movement brought him to tears.


same here, I always explore the tonal capabilities of my instrument to the fullest.



> That is not something you can do if constricted by Toscanini's quote.


sure you can - Toscanini loved expressive playing, demanded it from his musicians.....he told his clarinet player once [from my best recollection] <<for god's sake, do something there, do something right, do something wrong, but do something!!>>


----------



## Zofia

MatthewWeflen said:


> Also available in Hi-Res Blu-Ray audio ;-)

















Where??? :O


----------



## DavidA

NLAdriaan said:


> This incident happened with a horn player and in the presence of *Sviatoslav Richter, *who fully supported Kleiber as he found it unheard of that a member of the orchestra would be so brutal against a director.
> 
> So, who is unprofessional in this story?
> 
> Kleiber remains the most sheer musical of directors, if you watch his few rehearsal video's, if you watch his Carmen ouverture on DVD.
> 
> The greatest artists have forms of stage fright and you might even say that the most talented artists maybe even are unkown to us, as they don't perform for others.
> 
> As I see it, Carlos Kleiber was likely an ultra perfectionist and just could not accept imperfections. This seems somewhat difficult if you are dependent on so many others to deliver your sound.
> 
> Well, whatever it was, it remains a shame that we don't have more legacy of this incredible musical talent. Otto Schenk, who directed many of Kleibers opera performances, said he had been angry at Kleiber for not creating more music to the world.


Not exactly the best balanced of witnesses! :lol:

Richter was himself prone to walk out, even leaving the audience sitting waiting while he decided not to play. Sorry, this sort of thing is beyond the pail. I have no doubt Richter supported Kleiber - he would have done the same unprofessional thing. I was the victim of one of Richter's legendary cancellations and it is just not on. You don't expect a teacher to walk out of a class because a student says something he doesn't like. Or when my manager got on my nerves with his idiotic point making I didn't walk out. Why should musicians?


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Heck148 said:


> with Furtwangler, all too often it does come apart at the seams!! to me, that is not "dramatic", powerful, convincing....it's sloppy. badly executed...


I think this goes again to our differing priorities. Furtwangler was a risk-taker. As a performer I know all too well that the more risks you are willing to take, the higher the chance of mistakes. Conversely, the more careful you are to avoid mistakes the less likely you are to strike gold in creating a truly intense experience for the listener.

Furtwangler's performances were variable. They were hit or miss, which is what happens when you swing for the fences with every bar. As I said before, with Reiner you knew what you were getting. That is the tradeoff.

For me, I will gladly overlook the sloppiness for the gold Furtwangler produced. His 1942 9th is the most intense ever put on record, warts and all. Reiner's version is less high octane, but you have a clean, mistake-free reading. That just doesn't do it for me.

Different strokes for different folks. I would rather listen with a glass to the wall to great artistry in the next room than a pristine, clear, perfect recording that lacks inspiration.


----------



## MatthewWeflen

Zofia said:


> View attachment 112781
> View attachment 112781
> 
> 
> Where??? :O


Beethoven: The Symphonies (Dolby Atmos) [2 Disc Blu-ray Audio] https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07H62PFS4/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_ENYxCb5FR6VGV

And

Beethoven: 9 Symphonien [Blu-ray Audio] https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01D2FIN1C/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_dPYxCbSVX1RTP

1963 is also available at HDTracks.com, but it costs three times as much as the disc.


----------



## S P Summers

My vote is for the Karajan recordings from the early 1950's, except for the 9th; where the 1963 Karajan recording is the greatest in history.

This (for symphonies #1-8): https://www.amazon.ca/Karajan-Official-Remastered-Philharmonia-Symphonies/dp/B00HYFKJKK

This (for symphony #9): https://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-9-Symphonies-Ludwig-van/dp/B000001GBQ

Those are the definitive recordings for me, without question.


----------



## DavidA

S P Summers said:


> My vote is for the *Karajan recordings from the early 1950's*, except for the 9th; where the 1963 Karajan recording is the greatest in history.
> 
> This (for symphonies #1-8): https://www.amazon.ca/Karajan-Official-Remastered-Philharmonia-Symphonies/dp/B00HYFKJKK
> 
> This (for symphony #9): https://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-9-Symphonies-Ludwig-van/dp/B000001GBQ
> 
> Those are the definitive recordings for me, without question.


I think the 63 recordings are the best apart from no 6 which is superb in 1950s and the 77 ninth, which to me is the greatest on disc. we are, of course, debating excellence here!


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

I don’t think Karajan was definitive in any of the major symphonies, save perhaps for his ‘84 Eroica. Reliable, good sound, but not definitive. 

For a patched together set I’d recommend the following:

1 & 2 - Jochum
3 - Klemperer stereo
4 & 8 - Karajan 62
5 - Bernstein ‘76 or Carlos Kleiber
6 - Walter
7 - Böhm 
9 - Fricsay

The closest I could get to recommending a complete set would be Böhm, but I would still recommend supplementing the 5th with another version.


----------



## KenOC

Favorite recorded cycles, from the defunct Amazon forum some time back:

1 - Gardiner: John Eliot Gardiner, Orchestre Révolutionnaire et Romantique
2 - Karajan, 1963: Herbert von Karajan, Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra
3 - Furtwangler: Wilhelm Furtwangler, various orchestras (EMI box)
4 - Barenboim: Daniel Barenboim, Staatskapelle Berlin
5 - Walter: Bruno Walter, Columbia Symphony Orchestra
6 - Wand: Günter Wand, NDR-Sinfonieorchester
7 - Karajan, 1970s: Herbert von Karajan, Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra
8 - Jochum: Eugen Jochum, London Symphony Orchestra
9 - Klemperer: Otto Klemperer, Philharmonia Orchestra of London
10 - Toscanini: Arturo Toscanini, NBC Symphony Orchestra

And a more recent Frankencycle:

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


----------



## Malx

KenOC said:


> Favorite recorded cycles, from the defunct Amazon forum some time back:
> 
> 1 - Gardiner: John Eliot Gardiner, Orchestre Révolutionnaire et Romantique
> 2 - Karajan, 1963: Herbert von Karajan, Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra
> 3 - Furtwangler: Wilhelm Furtwangler, various orchestras (EMI box)
> 4 - Barenboim: Daniel Barenboim, Staatskapelle Berlin
> 5 - Walter: Bruno Walter, Columbia Symphony Orchestra
> 6 - Wand: Günter Wand, NDR-Sinfonieorchester
> 7 - Karajan, 1970s: Herbert von Karajan, Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra
> 8 - Jochum: Eugen Jochum, London Symphony Orchestra
> 9 - Klemperer: Otto Klemperer, Philharmonia Orchestra of London
> 10 - Toscanini: Arturo Toscanini, NBC Symphony Orchestra
> 
> And a more recent Frankencycle:
> 
> 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


Good days Ken, I remember the voting that went on - and the lively discussion.


----------



## Heck148

Brahmsianhorn said:


> I think this goes again to our differing priorities. Furtwangler was a risk-taker. As a performer I know all too well that the more risks you are willing to take, the higher the chance of mistakes. Conversely, the more careful you are to avoid mistakes the less likely you are to strike gold in creating a truly intense experience for the listener.


except Reiner was a risk taker, so was Toscanini.....these guys were drivers. they'd push the orchestra....fast?? yeh, we'll go fast. really fast.!! soft. yes. really soft. without slowing down...loud?? yes. very loud, " knock the plaster off the walls" loud...these guys pushed. drove the orchestra very hard, but they had great control..amazing control...



> Furtwangler's performances were variable. They were hit or miss, which is what happens when you swing for the fences with every bar. As I said before, with Reiner you knew what you were getting. That is the tradeoff.


 Toscanini and Reiner swing for the fences all the time...they hit lots ofhomers, and rarely strike out, if ever.,


> for me, I will gladly overlook the sloppiness for the gold Furtwangler produced. His 1942 9th is the most intense ever put on record, warts and all. Reiner's version is less high octane, but you have a clean, mistake-free reading. That just doesn't do it for me.


for me, Reiner's LvB 9 is 6he highest octane, esp the last mvt...amazing...great balance between all elrments... thrilling



> Different strokes for different folks. I would rather listen with a glass to the wall to great artistry in the next room than a pristine, clear, perfect recording that lacks inspiration.


a technically accurate performance that lacks any musical expression has little musical value....but that has no relevance to Toscanini or Reiner....


----------



## DavidA

_And a more recent Frankencycle:

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_

Any list that does not have Keiber's 5th is suspect to me.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DavidA said:


> Any list that does not have Keiber's 5th is suspect to me.


Furtwängler's 5th has way more power, depth, drama, and understanding of the work than Kleiber's, though I would choose the live BPO recordings over the studio version listed above.


----------



## MatthewWeflen

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Furtwängler's 5th has way more power, depth, drama, and understanding of the work than Kleiber's, though I would choose the live BPO recordings over the studio version listed above.


Certainly well played, but I've been spoiled by faster tempi on the 5th. Not Chailly fast, but somewhere in the Karajan-Gardiner range.


----------



## DavidA

MatthewWeflen said:


> Certainly well played, but I've been spoiled by faster tempi on the 5th. Not Chailly fast, but somewhere in the Karajan-Gardiner range.


Yes but I'd say that Kleiber and then Karajan really nail the piece as a classical symphony. Furtwangler is, of course, more in the romantic tradition. To say he has more power, depth and drama than Kleiber or Karajan is to misunderstand Beethoven's intentions. In fact the Kleiber is one of the all time classics of the gramophone.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

MatthewWeflen said:


> Certainly well played, but I've been spoiled by faster tempi on the 5th. Not Chailly fast, but somewhere in the Karajan-Gardiner range.


The key to Furtwängler is his rhythmic freedom. Sure the opening motif is stated more slowly - fate knocking at the door - but it speeds up after that. And the closing bars of the finale are so fleet and rhythmically free, not the boring feeling of anticlimax you get with most versions.

Incidentally, the recording I linked was Furtwängler's first return to the podium after the war. The reaction by the audience after the ending of this 5th was so euphoric that the American authorities became alarmed, fearing what amounted in their eyes to a German nationalist demonstration.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DavidA said:


> To say he has more power, depth and drama than Kleiber or Karajan is to misunderstand Beethoven's intentions.


It is precisely because Furtwängler had a greater understanding of Beethoven's intentions that his readings have more power, depth, and drama. He understood the dramatic narrative. He dedicated his life to studying it. Kleiber and Karajan make the opening movement sound more like simply a bunch of notes played fast. Kleiber plays it so fast the opening motif becomes a triplet. How is that keeping within Beethoven's intentions?


----------



## MatthewWeflen

Brahmsianhorn said:


> It is precisely because Furtwängler had a greater understanding of Beethoven's intentions that his readings have more power, depth, and drama. He understood the dramatic narrative. He dedicated his life to studying it. Kleiber and Karajan make the opening movement sound more like simply a bunch of notes played fast. Kleiber plays it so fast the opening motif becomes a triplet. How is that keeping within Beethoven's intentions?


I've never really understood these sorts of critiques. Certainly Chailly, Gardiner, or any other conductor who employs brisker tempi _believe_ that they "understand the narrative" of the music. It sounds more like you just enjoy a more deliberate pace, while others like things with more pep.


----------



## DavidA

MatthewWeflen said:


> I've never really understood these sorts of critiques. Certainly Chailly, Gardiner, or any other conductor who employs brisker tempi _believe_ that they "understand the narrative" of the music. It sounds more like you just enjoy a more deliberate pace, while others like things with more pep.


You can get Beethoven's intentions from the score, as a certain Mr Toscanini said. The marking is Allegro con Brio. Certainly anyone who doesn't think Kleiber gets power, depth and drama into his interpretation is listening to a different recording than me! It s truly one of the great performances on disc in my opinion - and a lit of others as well. Mind you Karajan doesn't come far behind in this symphony.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

MatthewWeflen said:


> I've never really understood these sorts of critiques. Certainly Chailly, Gardiner, or any other conductor who employs brisker tempi _believe_ that they "understand the narrative" of the music. It sounds more like you just enjoy a more deliberate pace, while others like things with more pep.


Sorry, but that's an invented rationale on your part. I gave specific reasons why I find Furtwängler's interpretation to be more revealing of the dramatic narrative, and it is NOT due to a more deliberate pace. If what you are saying were true, I would automatically deem every slow version to be better, which I don't. In fact, one of my favorite versions after Furtwängler's is Toscanini's 1933 recording (see my list on page 6), which is quite fast I can assure you! Again, the key to Furtwängler is the freedom in his tempo. Did you hear the closing bars of the finale? They are faster than Kleiber did them.

I do not believe the basic beginning tempo is the key to an interpretation. You and others have made it quite clear that you believe it is. I disagree.

I will agree with you on one point: There are many who like "pep" for the sake of pep. The faster the better. That's all the care about. I believe they are better off listening to pop music than Beethoven. Beethoven's music tells a story. It is not meant to be simply raced through without a thought as to variation and transitions.

Classical music is about variation, not a fast steady beat a la pop music.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

MatthewWeflen said:


> I've never really understood these sorts of critiques. Certainly Chailly, Gardiner, or any other conductor who employs brisker tempi _believe_ that they "understand the narrative" of the music. It sounds more like you just enjoy a more deliberate pace, while others like things with more pep.


I just compared the final minute of all three performances. I invite you to do the same. Karajan '63 and Kleiber are downright leisurely when compared to Furtwängler '47. You see, it is all about context. Furtwängler understood the dramatic narrative, when to push, when to pull. Do you understand now?


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DavidA said:


> You can get Beethoven's intentions from the score, as a certain Mr Toscanini said. The marking is Allegro con Brio. Certainly anyone who doesn't think Kleiber gets power, depth and drama into his interpretation is listening to a different recording than me! It s truly one of the great performances on disc in my opinion - and a lit of others as well. Mind you Karajan doesn't come far behind in this symphony.


Kleiber and Karajan are both good recordings. I'm just saying Furtwängler's was a more complex interpretation that unearths more of the drama. The Amazon list previously cited agrees.

Of course I'll admit Kleiber's reading is more popular today. It is much better recorded, and being blazing fast as opposed to thoughtful and complex is more in vogue in today's pop music, short attention span culture.


----------



## RockyIII

There are several complete sets of Beethoven symphonies that are highly rated. In recent years, I've only listened to the sets by Chailly, Gardiner, and two by Karajan, and I prefer Gardiner.


----------



## MatthewWeflen

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Sorry, but that's an invented rationale on your part. I gave specific reasons why I find Furtwängler's interpretation to be more revealing of the dramatic narrative, and it is NOT due to a more deliberate pace. If what you are saying were true, I would automatically deem every slow version to be better, which I don't. In fact, one of my favorite versions after Furtwängler's is Toscanini's 1933 recording (see my list on page 6), which is quite fast I can assure you! Again, the key to Furtwängler is the freedom in his tempo. Did you hear the closing bars of the finale? They are faster than Kleiber did them.
> 
> I do not believe the basic beginning tempo is the key to an interpretation. You and others have made it quite clear that you believe it is. I disagree.
> 
> I will agree with you on one point: There are many who like "pep" for the sake of pep. The faster the better. That's all the care about. I believe they are better off listening to pop music than Beethoven. Beethoven's music tells a story. It is not meant to be simply raced through without a thought as to variation and transitions.
> 
> Classical music is about variation, not a fast steady beat a la pop music.


I agree that tempo is not the only aspect of interpretation, though it is certainly one important aspect. It was just what leapt out to me when playing your linked video.

If I had to name the aspects of a performance (as a lay person) , I would say tempo, clipping phrases vs legato, volume and layering of sounds.

So Chailly, for instance, clips far to many phrases for me personally to feel much of anything. Does that make it wrong? He would argue (and does in the liner notes) that he is observing metronome markings.

Karajan strikes a nice tempo for me, and I like the fluidity of the phrases, though occasionally his "wall of sound" aesthetic obscures things I'd like to hear.

Gardiner lets me hear every part. His tempo is a touch fast for my taste, and the "historical" instruments sometimes sound a little thin.

Bernstein's tempo makes me impatient. The 5th needs drive and energy, and his is soporofic. Furtwängler's tempo seems similar.

But none of them are WRONG. They are a matter of taste, and arguments can be marshaled in defense of each. If we're trying to advise people on which to buy, I would default to saying "at least two" and personally steer them to Karajan and Gardiner.

On balance, I prefer Karajan 77 and Gardiner 94.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

MatthewWeflen said:


> If we're trying to advise people on which to buy, I would default to saying "at least two" and personally steer them to Karajan and Gardiner.


Furtwängler's energy builds. It doesn't hit you over the head out of the gate the way Kleiber does. Again, did you compare the final minute of Furtwängler, Kleiber and Karajan? What did you think?

My default for purchasing Beethoven's 5th is Kleiber and then Furtwängler to hear something more "old school." One provides fire, the other provides depth.

As DavidA likes to say, variety is the spice of life.


----------



## MatthewWeflen

I will compare this evening. Right now I'm with kids. And while they enjoy the 5th, I don't know if they're quite at the "enjoy it three times consecutively" stage just yet.


----------



## DavidA

MatthewWeflen said:


> I will compare this evening. Right now I'm with kids. And while they enjoy the 5th, I don't know if they're quite at the "enjoy it three times consecutively" stage just yet.


Enjoy your kids. They are the most important thing. You are, of course, perfectly right about tempi. Where Klemperer blows it IMO. He is simply too slow n the opening movement. Agreed about Chailly. Just feels rushed to me. But f you don't know Kleiber give that a spin.


----------



## MatthewWeflen

DavidA said:


> Enjoy your kids. They are the most important thing. You are, of course, perfectly right about tempi. Where Klemperer blows it IMO. He is simply too slow n the opening movement. Agreed about Chailly. Just feels rushed to me. But f you don't know Kleiber give that a spin.


I do have the Kleiber and enjoy it. Too bad he didn't record the entire cycle.


----------



## DavidA

MatthewWeflen said:


> I do have the Kleiber and enjoy it. Too bad he didn't record the entire cycle.


Gardiner did a very interesting orogramne on BBC called 'Playing Beethoven's Fifth' in which he argued that it was a revolutionary piece and should be played in a revolutionary way . Whether or not you agree with him it was a very interesting argument . Sadly it does not appear to be available at the moment. Frankly it completely contradicts the argument of speed for the sake of speed . I just cannot understand why anyone would say people are better off listening to pop music who like it played at the speed Beethoven intended . Not a persuasive argument to me


----------



## MatthewWeflen

DavidA said:


> Enjoy your kids. They are the most important thing. You are, of course, perfectly right about tempi. Where Klemperer blows it IMO. He is simply too slow n the opening movement. Agreed about Chailly. Just feels rushed to me. But f you don't know Kleiber give that a spin.


It always grinds my gears, aliens finding the golden record and thinking "what is this sleep music they put on here?" Klemperer's first movement is crazy slow.


----------



## MatthewWeflen

DavidA said:


> Gardiner did a very interesting orogramne on BBC called 'Playing Beethoven's Fifth' in which he argued that it was a revolutionary piece and should be played in a revolutionary way . Whether or not you agree with him it was a very interesting argument . Sadly it does not appear to be available at the moment


Is it this one?


----------



## DavidA

MatthewWeflen said:


> I do have the Kleiber and enjoy it. Too bad he didn't record the entire cycle.


He probably would've done if his freezer was empty. We could've done with a Kleiber cycle rather than Bohm's boring cycle


----------



## DavidA

MatthewWeflen said:


> Is it this one?


Yes looks like it. I might have been mistaken in the title . Thanks!


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DavidA said:


> Gardiner did a very interesting orogramne on BBC called 'Playing Beethoven's Fifth' in which he argued that it was a revolutionary piece and should be played in a revolutionary way . Whether or not you agree with him it was a very interesting argument . Sadly it does not appear to be available at the moment. Frankly it completely contradicts the argument of speed for the sake of speed . I just cannot understand why anyone would say people are better off listening to pop music who like it played at the speed Beethoven intended . Not a persuasive argument to me


It's about flexibility, not tempo. Who is faster in the closing bars of the finale, Furtwängler, Kleiber, or Karajan?

Also, you do not speak for Beethoven. Do you think he would have liked Kleiber's turning his motif into a triplet?


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

MatthewWeflen said:


> It always grinds my gears, aliens finding the golden record and thinking "what is this sleep music they put on here?" Klemperer's first movement is crazy slow.


Listen to Klemperer's live 1957 on Testament. It is scintillating.


----------



## DavidA

Interesting to listen to Furtwangler's reading of the fifth. He treats it as a romantic work - pulling the tempi around in the first movement. It is one way of doing it, but it is a post-Wagnerian view of Beethoven. Has its points undeniably but whether it is Betthoven is another matter!


----------



## Granate

I didn't know what to post here. I'm really happy with the ten cycles I chose as favourites in my challenges, and I wouldn't change Konwitschny's cycle for anything, but I'll try to come up with a list with the single recordings that left a great mark on me back then.

No.1- Bernstein NYPO (jaw-dropping)
No.2- Wand SOdNDR
No.3- Schmidt-Isserstedt WPO (a grower)
No.4- Gardiner OReR (so many good ones)
No.5- Tennstedt LPO (unbeatable)
No.6- Konwitschny LGO (literally, the sound of a breeze)
No.7- Szell ClO
No.8- Toscanini NBC 53 (tough to find one!)
No.9- Furtwängler BPO 42 (so tough to choose)


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

If I were to restrict myself to one conductor per symphony, I’d choose:

1 - Jochum
2 - Beecham
3 - Klemperer 
4 - Karajan 
5 - Toscanini (1933)
6 - Walter
7 - Kleiber (live)
8 - Böhm 
9 - Furtwängler (1942)


----------



## Itullian

Klemperer
Konwitchny
Bernstein both
Walter
Jochum emi
Szell


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DavidA said:


> I just cannot understand why anyone would say people are better off listening to pop music who like it played at the speed Beethoven intended . Not a persuasive argument to me


Pop music appeals more to people with short attention spans. You have to have patience to appreciate great classical compositions. They tell a story. If you make snap judgments based on tempo, then you lack the requisite patience. Beethoven's music has a story to it that the great interpreters follow. Skipping through it quickly caters to modern taste, not to Beethoven.

It's like reading a book as opposed to seeing the movie. If you lack the patience or don't have the time to read the book, fine. Just own it. Don't say people who choose reading prefer the laborious process of turning pages. They prefer the book because they want a more in-depth experience that the movie skips through.


----------



## MatthewWeflen

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Pop music appeals more to people with short attention spans. You have to have patience to appreciate great classical compositions. They tell a story. If you make snap judgments based on tempo, then you lack the requisite patience. Beethoven's music has a story to it that the great interpreters follow. Skipping through it quickly caters to modern taste, not to Beethoven.
> 
> It's like reading a book as opposed to seeing the movie. If you lack the patience or don't have the time to read the book, fine. Just own it. Don't say people who choose reading prefer the laborious process of turning pages. They prefer the book because they want a more in-depth experience that the movie skips through.


While I agree on pop music generally, I think the problem was your implication that someone who prefers a 30 minute 5th Symphony to a 33 minute 5th Symphony is somehow analogous to a pop fan with ADHD. :tiphat:


----------



## Merl

This week.....
1 Scrowaczewski
2 Norrington (Hannsler)
3 Weill
4 Mackerras RLPO
5 Honeck
6 Norrington (Hannsler)
7 Karajan Live 77
8 Markevitch
9 Leinsdorf


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

MatthewWeflen said:


> While I agree on pop music generally, I think the problem was your implication that someone who prefers a 30 minute 5th Symphony to a 33 minute 5th Symphony is somehow analogous to a pop fan with ADHD. :tiphat:


I'm speaking more to people who want firecrackers right at the beginning. Kleiber supplies that. But it is not sustained throughout the 30 minutes as well as the greatest interpreters.


----------



## MatthewWeflen

Brahmsianhorn said:


> It's about flexibility, not tempo. Who is faster in the closing bars of the finale, Furtwängler, Kleiber, or Karajan?
> 
> Also, you do not speak for Beethoven. Do you think he would have liked Kleiber's turning his motif into a triplet?


So I just listened to Kleiber's 5th again. To me, it seems like it does exactly this - flexibly applies tempi to elucidate particular phrases or aspects of the piece. I also don't think he is hurry-sick in the slightest - quite the reverse in fact, as movements 2-3 are actually quite a bit on the slow side.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

MatthewWeflen said:


> So I just listened to Kleiber's 5th again. To me, it seems like it does exactly this - flexibly applies tempi to elucidate particular phrases or aspects of the piece. I also don't think he is hurry-sick in the slightest - quite the reverse in fact, as movements 2-3 are actually quite a bit on the slow side.


Agreed. I never said Kleiber's was a bad reading. In fact I just stated earlier it would be the first version I would recommend to people and then supplement it with the Furtwängler.

Frankly I am getting tired of the tempo debates on this forum. It seems that some people use it as a simplistic way to invalidate recordings. A recording is either musical and interesting, or it isn't. The tempo doesn't dictate this.

Kleiber made my list of recommendations for the 5th on page 6. I was more defending Furtwängler from the charge of not reflecting Beethoven's intentions.


----------



## MatthewWeflen

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Agreed. I never said Kleiber's was a bad reading. In fact I just stated earlier it would be the first version I would recommend to people and then supplement it with the Furtwängler.
> 
> Frankly I am getting tired of the tempo debates on this forum. It seems that some people use it as a simplistic way to invalidate recordings. A recording is either musical and interesting, or it isn't. The tempo doesn't dictate this.
> 
> Kleiber made my list of recommendations for the 5th on page 6. I was more defending Furtwängler from the charge of not reflecting Beethoven's intentions.


I don't think it invalidates a recording on its own. But a slow tempo can become quite boring if there aren't other aspects of the performance to maintain my interest. Bernstein bores me to tears, Kleiber does not.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

MatthewWeflen said:


> I don't think it invalidates a recording on its own. But a slow tempo can become quite boring if there aren't other aspects of the performance to maintain my interest. Bernstein bores me to tears, Kleiber does not.


It's all a question of whether you can sustain the tempo you choose. Bernstein's VPO 5th does not. Böhm's VPO 5th also does not.

Bernstein's NYPO is much better. His best, though, is the 1976 Amnesty concert. This is the closest we have to a modern Furtwängler. All the power of the work comes through. It is my top stereo version, along with Kleiber and Giulini/LAPO.

This is a GREAT recording, rhythmically free and powerful. Better than Kleiber IMO, particularly in the finale.


----------



## MatthewWeflen

Brahmsianhorn said:


> It's all a question of whether you can sustain the tempo you choose. Bernstein's VPO 5th does not. Böhm's VPO 5th also does not.
> 
> Bernstein's NYPO is much better. His best, though, is the 1976 Amnesty concert. This is the closest we have to a modern Furtwängler. All the power of the work comes through. It is my top stereo version, along with Kleiber and Giulini/LAPO.
> 
> This is a GREAT recording, rhythmically free and powerful. Better than Kleiber IMO, particularly in the finale.


Indeed, it is Bernstein's VPO set I own. Ugh. There's twenty bucks I'd like back.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

MatthewWeflen said:


> Indeed, it is Bernstein's VPO set I own. Ugh. There's twenty bucks I'd like back.


It's actually one of the better sets around. Only the 3rd and 5th let down (of course those are pretty important!). The 7th is a standout, as well as the 9th.


----------



## KenOC

Generally, my tastes in Beethoven vary from day to day. Some mornings I wake up with an urge to dispatch my heavy armored divisions across the borders of some small defenseless country. Those are my Klemperer days.


----------



## DavidA

Tempi are important. Of course, Furtwangler does not reflect Beethoven's intentions as there are too many tempi variations whereas Beethoven wrote kit as a classical symphony. And of course tempo matters - it is part of the musical intentions of the composer - allegro con brio. That is why I can't get on with the first movements off Klemperer's 3rd or 5th. They are simply too slow. So is Firtwangler at the start of the 5th but then he speeds up. We're not calling for metronomic conducting here, but surely he is treating it as a romantic symphony not a classical?


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DavidA said:


> Tempi are important. Of course, Furtwangler does not reflect Beethoven's intentions as there are too many tempi variations whereas Beethoven wrote kit as a classical symphony. And of course tempo matters - it is part of the musical intentions of the composer - allegro con brio. That is why I can't get on with the first movements off Klemperer's 3rd or 5th. They are simply too slow. So is Firtwangler at the start of the 5th but then he speeds up. We're not calling for metronomic conducting here, but surely he is treating it as a romantic symphony not a classical?


Furtwängler was interpreting Beethoven's harmonic language, and doing so correctly. He studied it. How do you know he was wrong. Do you speak for Beethoven? I think those who ignore Beethoven's harmonic language and just speed through are the ones ignoring his intentions.


----------



## RogerWaters

Brahmsianhorn said:


> Pop music appeals more to people with short attention spans. You have to have patience to appreciate great classical compositions. They tell a story. If you make snap judgments based on tempo, then you lack the requisite patience. Beethoven's music has a story to it that the great interpreters follow. *Skipping through it quickly caters to modern taste, not to Beethoven*.


But aren't 'modern tastes' trying to re-calibrate performances speeds with the composer's own metronome markings???


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

RogerWaters said:


> But aren't 'modern tastes' trying to re-calibrate performances speeds with the composer's own metronome markings???


I don't believe so, no. I think the fast speeds are a modern fad. People here on the forum make the argument all the time that these works must be played quickly to sustain interest. For the reasons stated above I disagree.

I am a performer myself. My job is not to blindly follow the score. My job is to perform a work in such a way that the effect of the work reaches the audience. I have to be engaged as a performer and use both my heart and my brain.


----------



## wkasimer

Brahmsianhorn said:


> I don't believe so, no. I think the fast speeds are a modern fad. People here on the forum make the argument all the time that these works must be played quickly to sustain interest.


I don't recall anyone making such an argument.


----------



## DavidA

wkasimer said:


> I don't recall anyone making such an argument.


I just recall that people were saying that interpretation should follow the composer's wishes.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

DavidA said:


> I just recall that people were saying that interpretation should follow the composer's wishes.


A composer's wishes are that audiences enjoy and appreciate his work. That is why I think it is the duty of every performer not to simply blindly follow what he thinks the composer wanted but to use his own skill and imagination to make the music come alive for the audience.


----------



## KenOC

DavidA said:


> I just recall that people were saying that interpretation should follow the composer's wishes.


Well, except when the composer is clearly wrong. You know, like Schubert with his repeats.


----------



## Enthusiast

I tend toward trusting my ear rather than what is supposed to be in the score (which I can't read) and, anyway, it is not my experience that speed on its own is a critical factor in my enjoyment of a performance. But I am sure I read somewhere that Beethoven's metronome markings were not reliable for some reason. Does anyone know more?


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Hypothetically speaking, if we were to have a metronome marking from the composer, and it sounded wrong to most everyone in the orchestra and to everyone in the audience, what would be the point? To please whom? Music is for the living. As someone else once wrote on the forum, Bach would be pleased just to know we perform his music at all much less care that we follow his precise instructions.


----------



## wkasimer

Enthusiast said:


> But I am sure I read somewhere that Beethoven's metronome markings were not reliable for some reason. Does anyone know more?


You might want to listen to what Ben Zander says on the subject; his lecture accompanies his new recording of the 9th. I believe that it's on Spotify.


----------



## Mephisto26

Well, I am far from being an expert in this matter. However, I grew up with the early 60s Karajan set with the BPO and I still love it.

I bought the Immerseel set with Anima Eterna (HIP on period instruments) the year before the last. This is completely different. Very transparent, faster, and obviously with much better recording tech... I like it a lot.

I listened to Vänskä with the Minnesota Orchestra quite a few times. This is in between the two in a way. I like it too.

Chailly with the Gewandhausorchester is interesting at first, because of the fast tempi and the dark(er) sound. But the thrill wore off rather fast for me.

So with my limited experience, I would rank them as follows:

1. Karajan (BPO, early 60s)
2. Immerseel (Anima Eterna)

———

3. Vänskä (Minnesota Orchestra)

———

4. Chailly (Gewandhausorchester)


----------



## Merl

I think, to some extent, your perfect Beethoven tempo for each symphony is what sounds right in your head. However, that often changes with me day to day. Some days i like a slower Asahina-like reading and other days I like something brisker. Other days i'll take the middle ground. However what i do dislike is conductors dragging the music around so its ends up distended and sounding strange. Holding the 'daaaaa' at the start of the 5th is one particular example of something i dislike in Beethoven or dragging out the start of the 7th (and the scherzo must be brisker, for me, or ot sucks all the life out of rhe movement) . Painfully slow Eroicas, i find tedious.


----------



## Joek Baron

i completely agree, about karajan's 9th you mean the one with anna tomowa-sintow right? also could you give me your other recommandations for his other symphony's? so far i agree with you completely


----------



## Captainnumber36

PlaySalieri said:


> I go for the historical recordings - the best Beethoven 9 I have heard is Furtwangler's live performance from the 50s which is available on EMI. In fact I rate Furtwangler as the best for Beethoven. If you put recording qualiy above performance then obviously there are better versions. Karajan and Klemperer recorded probably their best verions of the 9 symphonies but in mono. Karajan's 1960s DG stereo cycle is fine.


This Furtwangler version is great, thanks!


----------



## Captainnumber36

But my favorite is Josef Krips w/ LSO.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Captainnumber36 said:


> This Furtwangler version is great, thanks!


The EMI 9 are mostly recorded in studio and don't represent his best.

The set to get is this one from Andromeda, which collects the best sounding live performances from the 50s:



















I would supplement this with the 1951 Bayreuth 9th, the same one from the EMI set but in a much more faithful transfer on Orfeo:










And of course the wartime recordings are a must, particularly the Eroica, 9th, and an unforgettable Coriolan Overture.

Unfortunately the Music & Arts and Andromeda sets seem to be hard to find. Your best bet here may be to seek out the online versions recently put out by "Tahra Gold," which contain the best transfers in any case.


----------



## Rogerx

My personal best.

In historical context this one perhaps

View attachment 161227


Freedom in Germany.


----------



## KevinJS

Bernstein in Berlin would be a cool one to own. I’ve heard that the sound wasn’t too great, but have never heard the recording, so your experiences would be useful, @Rogerx 

I have two recordings of the 9th by the Berlin Staatskapelle, which are quite interesting in the context of Ode An Der Freiheit. The first was conducted by Otmar Suitner, when the Staatskapelle was in the DDR. The other is conducted by Barenboim, by which time the orchestra was housed in a reunified Berlin and Germany. (Barenboim’s 9th is part of his box set. Don’t know where the Barenboim cycle fits in the hierarchy, but I like it, and it’s great value too.)


----------



## Rogerx

KevinJS said:


> I have two recordings of the 9th by the Berlin Staatskapelle, which are quite interesting in the context of Ode An Der Freiheit. The first was conducted by Otmar Suitner, when the Staatskapelle was in the DDR. The other is conducted by Barenboim, by which time the orchestra was housed in a reunified Berlin and Germany. (Barenboim's 9th is part of his box set. Don't know where the Barenboim cycle fits in the hierarchy, but I like it, and it's great value too.)


I was not there whilst recording, and yes the sound is not that good, however, if you watch the DVD you see the singers almost burst from proudness being there, as are the soloist for that matter. ( see cover below )

View attachment 161229


----------



## Kreisler jr

I saw it live on TV then and recall how a bit later Leinsdorf was rather indignant in an interview about Bernstein having changed the text. It's mainly a historical document and there was an early collectible edition with a small piece of the Berlin Wall as gimmick.
Not sure if I have heard it since but it was overall not a very good interpretation, rather slow and sloppy.


----------



## JTS

Kreisler jr said:


> I saw it live on TV then and recall how a bit later Leinsdorf was rather indignant in an interview about Bernstein having changed the text. It's mainly a historical document and there was an early collectible edition with a small piece of the Berlin Wall as gimmick.
> Not sure if I have heard it since but it was overall not a very good interpretation, rather slow and sloppy.


I picked it up at a charity shop and frankly it is a memento of a remarkable event rather than a serious interpretation to keep. Obviously the whole thing was cobbled together and it shows. But a remarkable historical event text change and all


----------



## FrankinUsa

Szell/Cleveland


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet

FrankinUsa said:


> Szell/Cleveland


The sound is not very good. Much better recorded cycles exist for this to be the sole recommendation.


----------



## haziz

TwoFlutesOneTrumpet said:


> The sound is not very good. Much better recorded cycles exist for this to be the sole recommendation.


IMHO, the sound of the Szell/Cleveland cycle (1960s Stereo Columbia) is quite good. It is a great cycle, certainly up there with Karajan 63, Anima Eterna/Immerseel and others.


----------



## MatthewWeflen

haziz said:


> IMHO, the sound of the Szell/Cleveland cycle (1960s Stereo Columbia) is quite good. It is a great cycle, certainly up there with Karajan 63, Anima Eterna/Immerseel and others.


Yep, just gave it a cursory listen on YouTube and from an audio standpoint it sounds comparable to Karajan '63.


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet

haziz said:


> IMHO, the sound of the Szell/Cleveland cycle (1960s Stereo Columbia) is quite good. It is a great cycle, certainly up there with Karajan 63, Anima Eterna/Immerseel and others.





MatthewWeflen said:


> Yep, just gave it a cursory listen on YouTube and from an audio standpoint it sounds comparable to Karajan '63.


Well yeah, compared to another early 60s recording, it is good but compared to modern digital cycles, it is not. Wand's cycle is just as good artistically and much better recorded. Now, I love the Szell set, the 7th Allegretto alone is worth the price of the set, but there are better overall sets, the Wand being one of them.


----------



## FrankinUsa

I gave my simple and honest opinion. Do you really want me to list all the recordings(analog and digital) after Szell that I actually own but I still go back to Szell/Cleveland?


----------



## Enthusiast

Perhaps more than any other - although Mahler runs him close - Beethoven's symphonies respond well to a wide variety of interpretations. A single best, of even 2 or 3 best, just wouldn't do it for me. I broadly agree with the reviews of Merl and find nearly all his A grade sets are closely aligned with my favourites. But, of course, he doesn't do the older recordings and (I think this is right) is no fan of Furtwangler's Beethoven, which are for me among the very best.


----------



## Knorf

There are so many worthy Beethoven cycles! It's extraordinary, really. And very few are truly not recommendable, depending on what you're looking for. Here are a few of my suggestions:

"Classic" big band: Karajan, take your pick among the four, and don't just ignore the digital cycle, no matter what detractors say.
Period instruments: Immerseel/AEB is my favorite.
Modern cycle on modern instruments, HIP flavored: Haitink/LSO.
Modern cycle on modern instruments, classic interpretations: Skrowaczewski/Saarbrücken.
"Classic" lean & mean: Szell/Cleveland.
"Classic" but Romantic-ish: Walter/Columbia.
Middle of the road but really good: Abbado/Berlin.
Historical and thought-provoking: Schuricht/Paris Conservatory.

YMMV. I will say it's well worth giving interpretations other than one's usual preferences a chance.


----------



## fbjim

The Abbado cycle is annoying because his best 9th was randomly a singleton on Sony which wasn't part of any cycle. Why was that even recorded, not that I'm complaining?


----------

