Kleiber/VPO & Bohm/VPO with Beethoven's 5th

Ian

It's many years since I heard the Boehm/VPO Beethoven Fifth. Are you sure that it's actually slower than the Kleiber, or is that not rather an effect of Kleiber's propulsive drive? What are the actual timings of the movements compared to Kleiber?

Boehm's Pastorale is lovely, though.

Graham

quote:

Originally posted by graham55:
Ian

Are you sure that it's actually slower than the Kleiber, or is that not rather an effect of Kleiber's propulsive drive? What are the actual timings of the movements compared to Kleiber?

Graham

Now you have me freaked if that can really be true. I can't find timings on the Bohm disks or liner notes. I'll have to time it playing sometime. Good as it is I can't face it for a third time tonight. ( 'Amateur!' - I hear you cry)

Ian

Dear Ian,

Thanks for this - interesting reading.

Graham may be right about pace/energy. And even if you have the timings, they can be a poor guide to speed. (e.g. Brahms 1st symphony - the track times show Jochum is quicker than Mackerras, but this is not the case, rather Jochum has missed some repeats).

I think the Kleiber has something of the essence of great Beethoven in that it impossible to ignore and has you instinctively wanting to armchair conduct along.

Beethoven's tempo markings tend to be rather quick, though as the likes of Zinman and Norrington have shown, a strict adherence to them is no guarantor of success.

As to the Pastoral, I have heard no finer account the Erich Kleiber (Carlos's father) with the Concertgebouw (though I actually have two recordings of him on this work, I cannot recall which the other orchestra is).

regards, Tam

Ian

People in Beethoven's age would have done well to hear the Fifth three times in a lifetime, so don't worry if you can't face it for a third time tonight.

And I may be wrong, but I think that the actual timings may surprise you.

Graham

Graham, you and Tam are very likely right - as someone who can't read a note of music I have no idea how much latitude conductors are allowed in such matters. In say a 30 min symphony how much variation could be expected between conductors (1 sec, 30sec, 1 min ?? ) Is the tempo really prescribed and doesn't normally get taken liberties with?

Ian

Ian

I can't answer your question, as I'd be no better off than a score than you. Maybe someone like Fredrik could help, if he sees this.

I maintain, however, that what you're hearing in Kleiber's Fifth is pulse and intensity, rather than speed. He was a conductor like no other and it's just a hell of a shame that he disliked conducting - and disliked recording even more.

For what it's worth, I believe that Kleiber observed all Beethoven's marked repeats, so a stopwatch may actually show that Boehm's recording is actually shorter in time!

Graham

Dear Graham, and Ian,

The issue of tempi and repeats is indeed a very complex one. I cannot quite leave this without an answer, but please bear with me till Saturday or Sunday, when I can start a brief thread, one post I would guess, on the subject.

I am terribly tired and will need to think of a way of expressing it cogently...

All the best from Fredrik

PS: On the issue of the two contrasted performances under discussion, it is precisely this type of contrast I value between readings in music I love. Both mentioned are in the front rank, and I have owned both in the past and studied them very carefully. I hate being negative and I did not dislike either, but I have retained neither in my library. I think I found the Boehm, perhaps the one I would return to more often in those days, but neither posess the energy and wonderful mucical lucidity of the mono Klemperer performance or the Erich Kleiber (with the Concertebeouw) set either, while I prefered by a big margin the marvelous live reading on Tahra with Wilhelm Furtwangler done in May 1954. These have renmained benchmarks for me, and while I would not suggest any one feel compelled to follow me, I can guarantee that there is not a duff one left among the selction of Beethoven symphonies as posted in my Record Library thread, which might inform at least thought on the subject. I am more than happy to discuss one individual symphony, but would find it impossible to attempt a description of the whole lot in one Thread.

That was almost a second post, I am sorry. Must sleep... ZZZZ, zzzz, ZZZZ! Fred

I'll look forward to being educated later then..

I hope it doesn't stop you sleeping !!


Ian

Dear Ian,

I am afraid the edit ran to a whole new post, if your are interested. Fred

Just done a similar comparison of these same conductors and Orchestra on Beethovens 7th. For what it's worth I find myself preferring the Boehm in this case. He captures the lyrical quality of the piece wonderfully well.

Ian

Dear Ian,

Two things! I am in the Boehm camp viz-a-viz C Kleiber in both these simphonies as indicated above, and second I did a nice new thread for you on Tempi and Repeats!

Must have a beer now, as I am thirsty! Marston Empire, which is an IPA, and very nice out of a bottle...

Fred

My reference for the 7th is a live performance conducted by Daniel Harding which I have mentioned a few times and which, sadly, does not exist on disc . For, me, above all, that is important in the work, is that the sense of joy is well conveyed (that and that it's exciting). However, of those that are on disc, for my money, Kleiber ranks amongst the finest.

regards, Tam

So, can anyone give details of the conductors' comparative timings?

Ian, you seem to have had a change of opinion as to the respective merits of these recordings. Or did I misread your original post?

Graham

Dear Graham,

I think in his earlier post Ian was talking only about the 5th, hence the different opinion when it comes to second (sorry if I'm reading you wrong there Ian).

As far as timings go, I cannot help since I don't have Boehm.

regards, Tam

Tam

You're absoluteiy right. What an arse am I!!!!

Graham

Thought I'd bump this thread up rather than start a new one...

I know we (at least Graham and I) discussed the recent orfeo issue of Kleiber's Beethoven 7 a month or two back (in a now locked thread). I note there (as I also noted when browsing amazon earlier) mention of orfeo issues of both the 4th and 6th. I've never got on hugely well with the 6th (though Kleiber snr's account ranks among my favourites) but I love the 4th very much. While these discs aren't stunning value (in terms of length), I wondered if either Graham or Todd (or anyone else for that matter) could comment on the performances in a little more detail.

regards, Tam

ok the scientist in me couldn't let this timing thing go. I found it very hard to believe that what I was hearing was purely the shape etc of the notes and not a real difference.

The words of wisdom about repeats etc told me that simply timing the playing of the record was not going to tell me much either since there may be more taken in one reading and I certainly wasn't competent to deteect that.

So I recorded the initial segment of each LP onto my MP3 player (yes, it's not an IPOD and can do such wonders). I then tried listening to them in an A/B fashion and sure enough the Kleiber really is played faster.

To confirm this and quantify this I read the mp3 into 'garageband' an apple MAC application which allowed one a graphical display of the 'beats' in each and after a little alignment at the start it was clear that the Kleiber was running about 10 sec ahead of the Boehm after the first 2 mins or so.

I've put the mp3 clips

Boehm mp3

and

Kleiber mp3

for anyone who cares to hear what I'm talking about.

Ian
(not freaked any more !)

Just learnt that cmd-shift-4 takes a screen shot on the mac so here is what the garageband traces look like.



Ian

(a new Mac zealot)

Dear Ian,

I'd say 10 seconds in two minutes really is closer than I would have expected!

I have several recordings for example of Bach's Third Brandenberg Concerto, where even the same performers (taking both repeats in the Finale) vary in temo enough to affect the timing by as much as a minute in fifteen!

All the best from Fredrik

Ian

I'm rather with Fredrik on this. Ten seconds over two minutes is hardly much and I'm sure that the Kleiber 'sounds' much faster. As a matter of interest - and allowing all Fred's points over repeats, etc - have you actually timed the two performances?

Graham

Fredrik & Graham,

Thanks for the replies. I had perhaps misunderstood your earlier comments, 10 sec extra in 2 mins is about 10% and I expected the tempo to be specified to at least that accuracy by the composer - but hey you live and learn.

No I haven't timed the performances overall yet but I'll report back if it get to it.

regards

Ian

Yes, C. Kleiber's 5th is extremely good...but it's not in the class of his father's or Furtwangler's May, 1947 recorded reunion with the BPO.

Compared to EK's and Furt's recordings, Klemp and Boehm put me to sleep. Hmmm...that may apply IMO to a wider repertoire than Beethoven's 5th....Of course, Klemps' Magic Flute and Don Giovanni recordings are top of my pile....

Regards.

Phil