Beethovens 4th

Lots. The fourth is one of my favourites. And the choicest individual disc is probably Gardiner and his Orchestra Revelutionnaire et Romantique (paired with a much less successful 3rd. Annoyingly, the disc seems to be deleted now and only available as part of his complete cycle, which at around £60 is not particularly cheap and, I think, rather patchy.

However, for sheer value for money (and also a cracking reading), I would go with Mackerras and the RLPO (on classics for pleasure, paired with the 6th for £5). However, the best solution of all is that the entire Mackerras cycle can be had for just £8 (including postage) from HMV. You will struggle to be disappointed.

George Szell's reading with the Cleveland Orchestra (paired, I think, with the 7th) is also fine (this may also have been deleted now though).


regards, Tam

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Tam:
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
However, the best solution of all is that the entire Mackerras cycle can be had for just £8 (including postage) from HMV. You will struggle to be disappointed.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________

Hi Tam, just wondered if this cd will give a good rendition of the 5th and 7th Symphonies in particular. I am looking for an energetic, dynamic presentation. Sorry to hijack thread about the 4th. I am wanting to hear more of Beethovens works in general and the 5th is the one I remember from school days and have been recommended the 7th as a powerful energetic work, and after that maybe the 4th...so could this cd be the one to go for as it has all of them on?

Cheers
Phil

The 7th is extremely good on that set (one of the very finest on disc). The 5th is also good, though it contains what is my largest reservation about the set, in that its opening is a little too predictable (this probably only sticks out because the set as a whole is so wonderfully full of surprise).

I know I've said elsewhere that of the 13 or so cycles I own the Mackerras is comfortably my favourite and one of only 3 that I would say don't really have any weak links (the others being Jochum and Davis, the latter possibly now deleted).

As I say, if you're looking to explore Beethoven the Mackerras set is an excellent buy.

However, as I'm sure Graham will be along to tell us, there are better 5ths and, arguably 7ths. Notably the wonderful Kleiber disc of the 2.

regards, Tam

Hi Tam, Many thanks...sounds like both of the those cd's will be a good starting point for me.
Regards
Phil

I very much recommend this disc by Carlos Kleiber. It's really a hot and exciting reading, and many Beethoven lovers rate this disc highly. You just can't go wrong with Carlos Kleiber and Beethoven.

To add some different perspectives, and the contrast is fully worthwhile, consider the EMI recordings in the Fourth of Furtwangler [VPO] and Klemperer [Philharmonia].

Before you throw up your hands in horror at the notion of Klemperer, it is important to realise that he was at the peak of his considerable powers in the 1950s when he set down what is still one of the freshest and most illumunating, and plain joyful accounts of this lovely symphony. In fact at the time his tempi were frequently faster than that other Titan of the period, Toscanini, but they never actually sound pressed foward un-naturally. The reputataion he had for being very slow in certain pieces stems from some recordings and concerts given in London in the late 1960s, when perhaps he should have considered retirement. Though even then, the old flame could still burn with the old siering intensity! Think of the uniquely compelling recording of the Missa Solemnis! That certainly is not slow, but it comes from much later than most his Beethoven recordings!

With Furtwangler there are a number of very fine Radio Tape recordings which have been released, played by both the VPO and BPO, though I only have two of these, from about 1943 and 1952.

More than apparently this symmphony was a great favourite with both these old master musicians.

They would make a pair splendid recomendations to run beside the others given above.

Far less easily recomendable as a recording, but a match for any since is Pablo Casals' recording for HMV done in Barcelona in 1928, where his crack orchestra give a performance of incredible warmth and joy, and the recording is clear rather than spacious, but more than enough to convey Casals' deep involvement in the music! It used to be out on various transfers, but the way Naxos are proceeding, they will have it out soon no doubt! They do very good transfers.

Kindest regards from Fredrik

I'm glad that Rubio got in before I saw this. There are two 'official' Carlos Kleiber Beethoven Fourths: the Orfeo Bavarian SO CD shown above and a Philips DVD with the Amsterdam Concertgebouw (coupled with the Seventh). It was annoying that, when Orfeo released their 'live' Bavarian SO Seventh last year, they didn't include that same Fourth, as they formed two halves of a single concert.

For the Fifth and Seventh Symphonies, the Carlos Kleber Vienna PO CD mentioned by Tam above contains two of the great orchestral recordings of the last century. It would be silly not to spend the £8 or so to get these.

I also recommend the Otto Klemperer MONO fecordings of the Fifth and Seventh with the Philharmonia, available as an EMI Great Recording Of the Century ("GROC"). Don't make the mistake of buying his later stereo remakes with the same orchestra, also available (separately coupled, I think) on EMI. (And to go even more off topic, don't miss Klemperer's wonderful MONO Philharmonia Eroica, also an EMI GROC.)

Perhaps we need to start a separate Beethoven Symphony thread, or has this been done recently?

Happy listening.

Graham

Dear Graham,

See this, now locked thread, so no reason why we shouldn't broaden this out from the 4th (must pick a Kleiber 4th at some point, though I've bought too many CDs over the weekend, including the Gilels Beethoven sonatas you recommended).

regards, Tam

This thread prompted me to play, for the first time in a while, the Klemperer 5 and 7 GROC, which I'm listening to now. And I need to put an earlier comment straight. The sessions for 7 included an experimental stereo recording, and that (only released some 30 or 40 years later) is the taping that appears on the GROC. Still from the mono sessions, though.

G

For the record almost all EMI sessions in London from November 1954 onwards had a separate recording team working the newly built stereo tape recorders in an entirely separate room. Walter Legge, EMI Columbia's chief producer at the time, was not enthusiastic, and considered it a nonesense to make a recording in two channels where neither was perfectly balanced! He considered the chances of an adequate balance being achieved in the home (the early issues including this famous Beethoven Seven set, first issued in stereo in 1955, where released on special tapes that I think played at 7 inches per second and required a special playback machine) were minimal.

But the early stereo tape recorders were rather unreliable, so that breakdowns during takes often meant that the stereo "piggy-back" recording remained incomplete at the end of a successful series of sessions in mono. No attempt was made to cover this with the result that the numbers of complete stereo recordings were rather small in the early days!

The first complete opera in stereo was the 1955 Vittorio Gui, Glyndebourne based, recording of The Marriage Of Figaro, which of course Decca soon recorded later that year as well in Vienna with Erich Klieber, and this has since eclipsed the EMI set in reputation, though I don't think so in artistry! Both stand at the very peak.

In that case the producer was Lawrence Collingwood [HMV's rather than EMI Columbia's chief producer, who, though very much senior to Legge in EMI, was essentially by then part time in the role of over-seeing recordings at this stage in his career, but was far more open to technical advances than than his younger college! He was also a great diplomat who had the confidence of many artists who simple could not work with Legge and his abrassive style of production and human relations), who saw to it that the stereo tape was complete.

The early history of stereo actually dates back to developements for EMI by AD Blumlein (who came to the EMI combine after the HMV merger with English Columbia in 1931), which were patented in 1934, where Beecham recorded a series of masters in "hill and dale" cut 78 waxes, though at that time there was only one playback set, and the idea was dropped till a satifactory tape machine came along. Eventually the modern stereo groove was perfected and allowed for LP vinyl discs to convey the recorded "bienauaral" signal. Blumlein was most concerned that the effect should be bienaural, and use just two microphones! Unfortunately that idea is only just now being returned to in and then only in some cases, with the result that some new stereo recording is now even as fine as the best mono of fifty years ago!

Kindest regards from Fredrik

PS: This information comes from the writings of Keith Hardwick and AC Griffith, both of whom worked as cheif EMI restoration producers on historical releases, and were more than adequately qualified to comment considering they had both worked at EMI from the days of wax masters!

Fredrik

I believe that Legge regarded stereo as a fad pretty much until he died. He regarded the Callas/de Sabata mono Tosca as pretty much his best ever production,

Apropos Legge not getting on with artists, Kathleen Ferrier was an EMI recording artist at the very start of her career, but left to join Decca after receiving 'unwelcome advances' from Legge (apparently in the back of a taxi). Schwarzkopf was not so principled, but she had a history of shagging Nazis during WWII. (Tam, I know that you won't like me to say this, but it's all well documented!)

Graham

Dear Graham,

I only mind in the sense that I'm not sure how well documented the assertion is - that said, it may very well be true. She was, after all, a happy colaborator with the Nazi regime (in contrast say to Furtwangler). It still irks me that she (and indeed Karajan) gets off so lightly in this regard in comparison. Only the other month there was an article in the gramophone of various artists queuing up to condemn him for not leaving (I think nobody knows whether they would until placed in such circumstances) and yet little mention was made of any such issues in her obit (in fact, her war time career isn't discussed at all). I wish Furtwangler had, for example, been allowed properly back to Bayreuth, then we might have had the ideal Furtwangler Ring on disc. Ah well....

However, I prefer to separate her politics and her behaviour from her art - and she was a very fine singer (to these ears, at least).

regards, Tam

Carlos Kleiber. If you go for a DVD, the other Carlos Kleiber recording.

Completely off topic but back to Fredrik's comment about Legge not being a particularly good egg, may I repeat a comment made about Fritz Reiner by one of his Chicago musicians shortly after his death: Not much of a conductor, but a hell of a nice guy.

Always cracks me up.

G

I tried to do a comparison of my four Beethoven 4ths by playing movement by movement of the four conductors. This is of course my personal preference and taste. My general impression is that almost whatever symphony; no conductor manage to be my favourite in all the movements. My ranking based on the comparison (bottom to top):

3rd. Mackerras/RLPO (Classics for Pleasure). A very exciting performance with excellent sound and fine playing. The tempos are on the fast side. It can appear a bit hurried to me, and the Adagio (2nd movement) can seem a bit uninvolving.

3rd. Furtwangler/BPO (Music & Arts) wartime recording. I compared my version from Music & Arts with the one from DG (1942-44 box) and I found the sonics of the former to be better. This recording I find intriguing. Generally, it's my least favourite of the four, due to the combination between slower tempo, lack of Walters flow and inferior sonics. However, the Adagio is just FANTASTIC, and my clear favourite 2nd movement. It has plenty of drama, emotion and profoundity. Generally, the old war-horses Furtwangler and Walter are best in the 2nd movement; while Kleiber is my favourite in the 3 other movements.

2nd. Walter/CSO (Sony). This performance has a lot of emotion and there is a very beautiful organic flow to it. Also, Walters recording hangs together the best way. It is on the slower side, but comes higly recommendable; especially because the coupling is one top-notch "Pastoral".

1st. Kleiber/Bayerisches Staatsorchester (Orfeo). This is a powerful performance with high tension and has perfect tempos according to my taste. Still it is also emotional when called upon, and would be perfect if the Adagio had more of the drama that Furtwangler provided.

I would consider the Kleiber and Walter CD's obligatory if you're a Beethoven fan, and that's probably not a revolutionary statement.

Dear Rubbio,

Please excuse this, but your approach is indeed misguided.

The point about a symphony is that the very word means, "music, which is viewed in one perspective." Same root as synopsis, as the word derives from the Italian, "Sinfonia."

Therefore the view must be a comparison of whole readings! Startling as that might sound, it is what gives a continuous performance, experienced live, its edge over any studio recording where the idea of a single view is lost as soon as a make up take is made. No doubt the approach is fun, but it is not what is the intention of the composer or even the performers!

Please accept this as the kindest advice, but get to know each performance you cite, and if there is something definately not enjoyable to you in this or that recording, then reject the whole performance. It is not a cut and past issue!

Sorry to sound trenchant, but I care enough to find that "bits off" excerpts can be rather misleading about the ultimate quality and long term appreciation of an individual reading of a great work - after all it is the work and its facets brought out that is the issue, rather than some mogrel style reading, or even one particular reading. The score will frequently reveal what no recorded performance ever could in practice, because the reading of it will reflect your own nderstanding of the work, just as the performeres bring the very own understanding it out the the sounds created.

Rarely are two perfomances (even by the same artists at different times) sufficiently similar in view to get really more than the most distorted view of the work in hand from a cut and paste method.

Please do beleieve me, enjoy each performance for its insight, but don't imagine any real comprehension of either the music or the intentions of the performers to try and bring the music to life can come from this method.

This meant in the kindest way, and not a lecture, so please forgive the post,

KIndest regards from Fredrik

Dear Fredrik and Rubio

Ever heard of 'Fanfare' magazine ? Published here in the US on the east coast. It's been almost decades since I last opened a copy, but the reviewers were of the New England School Marm approach.


They didn't pick a piece apart movement by movement, but literally, bar by bar. Not realizing, as Fredrik points out, that it is the Forest and not a few trees that are in question. Reading Fanfare, I was often reminded of Beecham's line about music critics being able to read music, but not hear it. So in general I would agree with Fredrik, who makes a very valuable point.


However, the nice thing about a recording, is that we may approach a work like Beethoven's Fourth, from whatever angle or method we desire. This is what makes it all such fun.

As for me, these days I am less concerned with how X performs a certain piece, than said work itself.


Regards

BB