Favorite set of Beethoven Symphonies

quote:

... , Brahms which I always thought a snooze, Ha! on me. I love learning something new.

Dear Glen,

Brahms is no snooze, if the performance penetrates to the heart of the matter! The trouble is that there are so many dull Brahms performances! Like Haydn it is possible to bring off a perfect technical performance of his [their] music, which completely misses the point!

ATB from George

quote:

Originally posted by George Johnson:
Since then I have [or have had] sets by Adolf Busch, Mogens Woldike, [August Wenzinger, Benjamin Britten, Otto Klemperer, Adrian Boult, Herbert von Karajan], Hans Martin Linde, [Trevor Pinnock], and one other whose performers I cannot still remember, as well as knowing the set from the Virtuosi of England on the budget Classics for Pleasure label which strikes me as among the very best though not by famous names or on original instruments.

Dear George

Must be La petite Bande / Sigiswald Kuijken live 1990

One of the interesting things about Virtuosi of England (well the players were not that unknown) is, even if they use modern instruments, that they used one player pr. part in the ripieno for all the concerts (concerning concerto no.1 this had as far as I know never been done before in a recording).

Yes, the danger of regarding one interpretation as definitive is that you miss the richness of other approaches and in the end adopts a restricted picture of the music in question. As you know I grew up with Klemperers studio recordings of LvB´s (and Brahms´) symphonies, and I shall forever keep a weak spot for these recordings. From a more rational point of view though I also consider them among the most consistent and rewarding interpretations, but I have since long felt the need for additional interpretations, like (as to the LvB symphonies) Bruno Walter´s NYPhil. set, Mackerras´ Liverpool set, Sawallisch´s Concertgebouw set and Cluytens´ Berl.Phil. set. I also agree very much about the Eric Kleiber recordings, while I in the long run find Carlos Kleiber´s 5th. rather theatrical. Gardiner is not my cup of tea. He reminds me of Karajan = cold and uncharming perfection.

ATB
Poul

quote:

Originally posted by pe-zulu:
Gardiner is not my cup of tea. He reminds me of Karajan = cold and uncharming perfection.

ATB
Poul

One man's meat is another man's poison.

I find the Gardiner to be full of fire and passion, speaking directly to my heart in Beethoven's own voice.

Jochum, Reiner and Toscanini are also very fine, as is Szell, all conductors rarely mentioned on this forum, and Abbado is another.

Thinking a performance is definitive is completely different from having a current favorite, as favorites can change over time.

Does anyone know of really new recordings of these symphonies, reflecting some more current ideas?

For me, this is interesting, to look at performances across decades, right up to the current time.

Over time, things change. For better or for worse, that is the root and soul of a work, showing its fundamental essence in the differences over time.

At any rate, I would be grateful for any contemporary recommendations.

quote:

Originally posted by mikeeschman:

At any rate, I would be grateful for any contemporary recommendations.

Regarded by some as the best set of them all.

Some comments here

Many people admire this Harnoncourt, but it dates from 1991, three years before the Gardiner.

Has anyone done a new set since 2000, that has at least one admirer?

I haven't found a search strategy that can answer this question.

The newest set I have is Abbado/Berlin on DVD, which dates from 2000-2001.

Don’t think I’ve heard my favourite ‘Nine’ yet. In fact I’ve only listened to half a dozen different versions so far and not spent much time exploring the differences, (a couple of my vinyl sets may have put me off slightly)
But so far the set I enjoy the most is by Josef Krips conducting the London Symphony Orchestra...

quote:

Originally posted by mikeeschman:

quote:

Originally posted by pe-zulu:
Gardiner is not my cup of tea. He reminds me of Karajan = cold and uncharming perfection.

I find the Gardiner to be full of fire and passion, speaking directly to my heart in Beethoven's own voice.

Thinking a performance is definitive is completely different from having a current favorite, as favorites can change over time.

Maybe it is just me, but I do not hear Gardiner´s fire and passion.

During the last years my position as to favorite recordings has changed. The artistic level of most recordings is so high, that the majority of recordings can be enjoyed almost without reservations. So I rather count with my non-favorite recordings, which are the ones I do not warm to. And I have stopped comparing recordings directly and instead I enjoy every recording to the full on its own terms. Almost every new recording widens my horizon, and multiple collecting becomes almost mandatory. This is a very rewarding approach, andf if you are attentive many excellent recordings can be purchased rather cheap.

Your preferences do not run towards Gardiner, but mine do. I am sure that is all it is.

For me, it is as natural as breathing to compare recordings and ponder the differences. It's just another way to draw more from a collection.

There are very many fine sets of Beethoven symphonies, catering to different tastes.

It is interesting to read about the choices people make. Each listener brings something different to the experience.

quote:

Originally posted by mikeeschman:
Your preferences do not run towards Gardiner, but mine do. I am sure that is all it is..

OK

quote:

For me, it is as natural as breathing to compare recordings and ponder the differences. It's just another way to draw more from a collection..

Not in my opinion. Rather the contrary. I find that too much comparison detracts from my enjoyment of the individual interpretations. I prefer to use the score and my musical knowledge as a reference, when listening to a recording.

quote:

There are very many fine sets of Beethoven symphonies, catering to different tastes..

Yes I know, I own about 25 of them myself.

I have three full sets, and six partial sets.

Comparing them is highly entertaining and quite illuminating.

Right now, I am seeking out a new set. I would like to have something since 2008 or so. I would like to know the current thinking. So far I am having no luck.

Curiosity compels me.

quote:

Originally posted by mikeeschman:
Right now, I am seeking out a new set. I would like to have something since 2008 or so. I would like to know the current thinking. So far I am having no luck.

Curiosity compels me.

The most important of the newest are to my knowledge (on modern instruments) Vänskä, Dausgaard and Järvi. I own Vänskä and the first volume of Dausgaard. All three are rather similar. The playing is very good. The style is relatively objective, essentially not much different from Mackerras and Zinman. On period instruments van Immerseel. Again fine playing but not much new thinking.

Thanks for that, pe-zulu. I will look into those.

Just a plug for Gunter Wand and the NDR Orchestra on RCA. The more I listen to it the more I admire how Wand combines the best of the old(the granite like authority of Klemperer) with the new(quicker tempos and crisp articulation of the best of the modern interpretations). Very good sound as well. My recommendation

Sister xx

quote:

Originally posted by Sister E.:
Just a plug for Gunter Wand and the NDR Orchestra on RCA. The more I listen to it the more I admire how Wand combines the best of the old(the granite like authority of Klemperer) with the new(quicker tempos and crisp articulation of the best of the modern interpretations). Very good sound as well. My recommendation

Sister xx

Agreed. The same applies f.i. to the Kletzki set and the Maag set.

I will never own 25 sets of anything musical.
Pe-zulu, what was your motivation?

Is anyone familiar with the Beetoven cycle by Immerseel and the Anima Eterna?

BBC Radio Three broadcast the Immerseel recording of the Fifth when the set was released. I was very impressed. The performance was quick fire, on a small orchestra [playing Beethoven period instruments - obviously different to Bach period instruments], so that the fast tempi did not seem forced or rehearsed into tedium or loveless perfection, but were compelling. [At similar tempi to Carlos Kleiber, the result completely avoided the sense of over-wrought theatricality I find in this edited to death DG/VPO production].

Of course eventually the performance might eventually seem "one dimensional" - lacking a sense of spiritaul struggle against the wiles of Fates, though my immediate reaction was that I should buy the cycle. I did not, because there simply was no spare money, but one day perhaps!

If you enjoy the Gardiner set then I am sure that you would also enjoy the Immerseel! I however definitely preferred what I heard of it to anything I have found in the Gardiner, which though fast and crisp strikes me as more like Karajan in its cold perfection than anything else.

Your mileage will probably be different, but even though pe zulu [I believe] likes some of the modern performances from Maag and Zinmann, I have only found Vanska to be apt in my own preferences, among the latest generation of Beethoven Symphonic conductors on modern instruments at least.

ATB from George

quote:

Immerseel and the Anima Eterna

Thanks George, I'm giving these a try :-)

Listening to the Gardiner Eroica this morning, and playing with a metronome, it became apparent that Gardiner hews close to the metronome markings that Beethoven placed in the score.

So much for it being too fast.

As for cold precision, I never find real precision to be to cold in this symphony. In fact, over the past decade, the only recording I found to be ruined by a "cold" presentation are Steven Hough's Rachmaninoff Concertos.

Passion and precision are not mutually exclusive.

At the same time, I have been enjoying Abbado/Berlin doing this symphony, which employs rubato liberally and to good effect.

Two different and equally enjoyable performances.

Beethoven himself said that nothing was more important in preforming his music than playing at the appropriate tempo, and that he provided metronome markings to insure his works would be performed as he intended.

Beethoven himself said that nothing was more important in preforming his music than playing at the appropriate tempo, and that he provided metronome markings to insure his works would be performed as he intended.

Dear Mike,

When and to whom did he make this remark? And in what context, please?

I would think that Beethoven would in reality have considered many aspects in performance more important than adhering literally and precisely to a metronome mark. Things like clear musical balances in the lines, musical phrasing, as marked, often in great detail, in the score, good tuning, good ensemble, well judged dynamic control, fine tone from the instruments. Accurate articulation ... in reality the tempo is by no means the most important aspect of performance so it would fascinating for me to find the reference to Beethoven considering the tempo the most important.

ATB from George

George, I posted a comment from a letter quoted in the Solomon biography, which I am re-reading at the moment.

It is from a section of the biography that specifically references his preoccupation with the metronome.

I will keep notes as I read, and will try to post a more comprehensive explanation over the coming weeks.

I curse the utility of book indexes and the internet, for when you find a reference, if you neglect to write down page numbers and/or search arguments, it can take weeks to re-find that which has been already found. But a through rereading will provide the result.

This compels me to make a random observation. With Bach's music, the inner glory shines through at any tempo. But Beethoven only "lights up" when the speed is correct.

On this forum, a few things about Beethoven are never mentioned, and chief among these are his inflexible genius allied to a resolute impatience.

This was not a man who meandered. This is a resolute long distance runner, with an overwhelming faith in humanity.

That implies that the Erocia is quick and playful. At least that's how I hear it.

quote:

But Beethoven only "lights up" when the speed is correct.

I disagree.

The later Klemperer stereo Eroica is at a speed throughout designed to cope with a marathon distance even in the “heat and thin air of Mexico,” is more powerful and revolutionary than even the estimable performance by Erich Kleiber, at least for me and a significant number of Beethoven "fans." If you think that Klemperer's tempi are an accident, or plain wrong then you might wish to consider that in the First, Eighth, and Ninth symphonies Klemperer consistently gave performances that were at or very close to the metronome markings. Klemperer worked on a tempo [or more accurately, a set of precise tempo relationships through a whole work] that brings out the power and spiritual warmth of the work in question, so that he sometimes is faster than conventional and sometimes slower. It is an artistic judgment, and given that Beethoven's metronome is at least suspect then it is well not to fix one's self to rigidly to the ixion's wheel, or else the mind becomes closed to many great possibilities from the performance standpoint.

Solomon is one or those, who, like Klemperer, sometimes offers a significantly slower actual tempo than the metronome marking might indicate were correct, if we could believe in the reliability of Beethoven’ metronome in the first place

ATB from George

PS:

Your wrote: This was not a man who meandered. This is a resolute long distance runner, with an overwhelming faith in humanity.

That implies that the Erocia is quick and playful. At least that's how I hear it.

You really will have to explain to me why the one follows the other, as I do not see it as following, intuitively. Of course when you have explained it, I'll instantaneously see why Klemperer was a dull misguided old bore and Gardiner is what Beethoven has been waiting for for two ceturies! I have never seen the Erooica as being even remotely playful, but rather redeeming in its shift from the first two movements of utter tragedy, brought in clasical style to a more or less optimistic end [faith in humanity perhaps?] - Scherzo and Finale.

The Finale is based on the Prometheus Music, and Prometheus was was "the bringer of fire," and by implication, light - the point of this symphony is belittled in calling it "playful." It is nothing of the sort. It is cosmic. It is the life enhancement of believing in the essential goodness of humanity of the long term. That has nothing to do with a sprint and everything to do with a marathon.