No comments about Hans Pfitzner: Complete Orchestral Works [Box Set].

No comments about Mozart: Abduction From The Seraglio / Die Entfuhrung aus dem Serail.

5 comments about Mahler: The Complete Symphonies & Orchestral Songs / Bernstein.

1. The obvious advantage of this collection lies in emphasise upon the wholeness and unity of Mahler's music. It is as if there existed no essential difference between the symphonies and the orchestral songs - text and music belong to one and the same universe. The drawback lies in the mixed quality of Bernstein's interpretations, where the vocal artists are simply outstanding. As for the symphonies, Bernstein, as usual, has made painstakingly beautiful interpretations of the purely orchestral numbers, like 1, 5, 6 (unfortunately keeping the old order of the 2d and 3d movements), 7 and 9. The eighth symphony (recorded in 1975, long before the other ones) is partly a catastrophe: Bernstein, the orchestra, the choirs and the soloists are running like a whole hunting-party through the whole first movement, pantingly slowing down in the second one into a sometimes extraordinary sluggish tempo. The third symphony is wrecked by the terrible children's choir in the fifth movement - they are not singning, they are screaming. I both like the collection and utterly dislike it.



2. Most buyers aren't in the market for a complete Mahler cycle from one conductor, but if they were, the two from Bernstein contain many great performances. I've reviewed the contents of the Sixties cycle on Sony and this later one from the Eighties (contianing many live performances) on DG, taking them one symphony at a time. But it's worthwhile to give a sense of the strongest and weakest parts of each set.
   
   Cycle #1:
   
   By general consensus the performance of Sym. #3 is one of the glories of this cycle and perhaps the most inspired Mahler condcuting Bernstein did on disc. It has all the freshness of discovery--LB was new to Mahler in 1961. Sony's 20-bit remastering makes the original analog sound quite good--in fact, there's no need to comment on the sound quality of these NY Phil. recordings, none of which are bad. Expect the deep sound stage and wide stereo separation that Columbia Records favored at the time.
   
   Bernstein also put his stamp on Sym. #7 in such a way that no one would ever hear it the same again. 'The Song of the Night,' as this work was dubbed, had almost no life either on disc or the concert stage (Mahler champions as prominent as Bruno Wlater never performed it). Not only did LB prove that this was coherent music, he made an unforgettable drama out of the Seventh. This is his signature recording of the work.
   
   Two other great performances stand out: Sym. #2 and #4, each rendered with amazing imagination and a huge range of emotions. The accusation that LB went over the top in the Second is unjustified--he is often tender and delicate--but there's no doubt that he takes an apocalyptic view of the finale. Whatever you think about his approach, he single-handedly revolutionized the way that the Resurrection Sym. was played. In Sym. #4 the classic recording was by Bruno Walter, but LB added more depth, imaginaiton, and excitement. Lyric soprano Reri Grist has come in for a good deal of criticism in the vocal finale, but I think she fits beautifully into LB's overall conception.
   
   In the middle of the pack, as it were, we get LB's readings of Sym. #1 and #9. He went on to conduct greater readings of both works, especially the Ninth. In person LB's First was a real showpiece, but somehow Sony's sonics are not up to the conductor's vision. In the cse of the Ninth, the NY version would qualify as an outstanding performance if there weren't so many truly great ones from Karajan, Bruno Walter, James Levine, and Barbirolli, among others. Bernstein himself would add two of the greatest, both on DG.
   
   I find a few problems wiht Sym. #5, #6, and #8 in the first cycle. For many critics all three are great recordings. For some reason, I have never warmed up to either of LB's versions of Sym. #5, where for once he does manipulate and exaggerate to the point that the spirit of the work seems lost in histrionics. Sym. #6 is too brisk in the first movement to let the music expand to its visionary potential, and in the other movements Bernstein seems less expressive than he could be. The Eighth is unmathced in the excitement and joyousness of Part 1, and for some listeners the whole symphony remains on that exalted level. I find that LB is too studied in Part 2, and my attention wasn't held. He does elicit very beautiful singing and playing, however. It should be noted that this performance is with the London Sym. and a host of fine English singers.
   
   To the end of his life Bernstein resisted Deryck Cooke's completion of the Tenth Sym., agreeing to conduct only the shattering Adagio. which Mahler had essentially finished in full score. Bernstein's reading with the NY Phil. is one of the most searing accounts this magnificent fragment has ever received, equaled by his later live reading with the incomparable Vienna Phil.
   
   Cycle #2:
   
   It should be said right off that DG's digital sonics are in a different league from what LB got in New York. Even though several venues were involved (Vienna, Amsterdam, New York), and many recordings were under live concert conditions, the DG engineers triumphed. They favor closer mike posiitons, solo highlighting, and a vivid sound stage compared to their predecessors in New York. As to the interprettions, with a few exceptions--the most prominent being Sym. #6--Bernstein did not drastically change his views from the first cycle, and in some cases the readings feel almost identical (Sym. #2 and #7, for example).
   
   The most interest centers on the works where LB clearly outdoes his younger self. At the top of the list I would put Sym. #6 and #9. In the former he achieved one of the classic Mahler reacordings of the modern era. His Sixth has slowed down by 2 min. in the first movement, giving the music room to expand properly. The Andante is heartbreaking and heartwarming at the same time. The finale is an explosion of genius on Mahler's part that LB resonates with perfectly. Almost the same can be said of the Ninth, where the conducting reaches deeply moving areas of expression. The finale is drastically slow (as is Levine's, to similar devastating effect), which some critics find excessive. But it's a truism that no tempo is right or wrong; everything depends upon being drawn into the world of the music. LB achieved a great Ninth but would surpass himself with a live performance from Berlin in 1979, also on DG.
   
   Almost as great is Sym. #1, which on DG receives a flawless performance packed with excitement. I'm not sure that LB's reading actually changed, but the superlative sonics and the spine-tingling playing of the Concertgebiuw weren't matched in New York.
   
   The next thing to ask is where Bernstein fell short of his earlier versions. The Sym. #2, #3, and #4 from New York were one of a kind, representing LB's early and most exciting explorations of Mahler's world. Their counterparts on DG are also strong, but I don't think they rise to the heights he achieved earlier. The only sharp criticism I have is with the use of a boy soprano in the finale of the Fourth; musical as he is, a boy is too undeveloped to capture what Mahler intended. It should be said, however, that if the earlier NY versions didn't exist, these would be outstanding performances.
   
   I feel much the same about Sym. #7, where LB's first recording set a standard that only two or three rivals have come close to, but his DG remake, which was a return to the NY Phil. in oncert from Lincoln Center(as are Sym. #2 and #3), feels fractionally less overwhelming. It's in better sound, however. The one symphony I can't compare is the Fifth, which doesn't satisfy me in either cycle. The DG version with the Vienna Phil. convinces many listeners, and some critics call in unsurpassable, but I am not on its wavelength.
   
   That leaves Sym. #8, which Bernstein didn't live to record for commercial release. DG reached into its vaults for a live 1975 radio tape from Vienna, and although it has flaws in execution, including some rough singing in Part 2, LB's conducting is superlative, more ocmpelling than his version from London. Paired with this symphony is a 1974 reading of the Adagio from Sym. #10, also with the Vienna Phil. As you'd expect, it's an inspired, searing reading, just like the NY version.
   
   How ot sum up? If money were no object, I'd own both cycles for the pleasure of Bernstein's unqiue inspiration. If I had to pick and choose, I'd take Sym. #2, #3, and #4 from New York, Sym. #8 from London, and the rest form the DG cycle.



3. Leonard Bernstein was indeed a great exponent of Mahler's music, especially during the sixties. But, I am sad to say, he was not always its best interpreter. Bernstein's presentations of Mahler are often big and bold - or, in other words, overloaded - and occasionally he even adds instrumental effects just to make the music to sound even more swollen (consider, for example, the addition of a bass drum stroke in the ultimate chord of symphony no. 1). Passages that require sophistication are often underlined with broad, syrup-sentimental strokes. This is especially the case with these late Mahler recordings, which Bernstein made for DG.
   
   In some people's taste, this is just wonderful. They want showpieces and nothing else. But other people might have other intuitions regarding Mahler's music. For example, they want orchestral balance and not too deliberate takes.
   
   Now this DG set is incredibly expensive - $191! My advice, if you want a set with Bernstein's Mahler, is to look for the set with his earlier recordings for CBS/SONY. You get it for a third of the price ($ 63), and the interpretations are usually far better in all respects (with the exception of No. 5).
   
   But if you just want the best box with the complete symphonies of Gustav Mahler, I would recommend Rafael Kubelik's set (DG collectors series) as the first choice. Kubelik's interpretations are far more balanced and presented without mannerism, and, overall, his set is more consistent than any of Bernstein's. For reference, you could then add the selected gems of Bernstein's early Mahler recordings: Nos. 2, 3, 7, 8, and 9.
   
   Thus I give two stars for this DG set, three stars for the earlier CBS/SONY set, and four stars for Kubelik's set.



4. Although I am a fan of Bernstein's Mahler, I would not recommend this set, especially at its price point. Why do I say this? First, during the last few years of his career (and also, his life), the period in which these recordings were made and where he became increasingly beset by health problems, is riddled by performances in which Bernstein's ability to take great romantic pieces, in this case, the Mahler symphonies, to their emotional and dramatic extremes has degenerated into a heavy handed, enervating self indulgence, marked by dragging tempos and mannered, pompous distentions of phrasing. Secondly, because for the price of two hundred dollars for the set and on DVD (or twenty nine dollars per disc if purchased separately), there are available from the Leonard Bernstein zShop at the amazon.com site live accounts from the early and middle 1970s by Bernstein conducting the Vienna Philharmonic (with the exception of the second symphony being with the London Symphony) of all of the symphonies (but not any of the song cycles). Those performances retain the energy, vigor and intensity of his groundbreaking 1960s cycle, but with added nuance and depth of expression, together with more beautiful and sensitive orchestral playing, and also, a warmer, more full bodied sound (all are in stereo) than one gets from the often dry sounding 1960s studio recordings. Two hundred is expensive, granted, but it is not that much more than the Mahler symphony sets at full price, and, moreover, you get to see as well as hear Bernstein conduct, which is a treat in itself (the videos are in quite decent color). Unfortunately, these recordings have not been issued domestically. The only drawback is that the notes for these recordings, which are imports from Japan, are only in Japanese. Nevertheless, I would strongly recommend that set, for the performances contained therein represent Bernstein at his apogee in this music.



5. Ten years ago, I would not have evaluated this set in the same way. At that time, I thought Bernstein's Mahler and Mahler's Mahler were one and the same. Now my perception is that while Lenny did Mahler a great service in the '60s with his pioneering complete set on CBS (now Sony), in the '80s Bernstein smothered the music with his own apparent agenda. Put another way: If Bernstein in the '60s was "selling" Mahler to a skeptical audience, in the '80s he seemed to be selling his own interpretive stamp as the ONLY way to play this composer's music, overshadowing the less interventionist viewpoints of any rival conductors. It takes an outsized musical personality to eradicate most of what is recognizably Mahlerian in these scores and turn the composer into a hybrid--Mahlerbernstein or even Bernsteinmahler--but Bernstein was just the man for the job.

   Compared to the more consistent (if in some ways outmoded) CBS series, the DG cycle is uneven in its successes, if quite uniform in its overall approach (less nervous energy, more world-weariness--even in the "young man's music" that is Mahler's First Symphony--and more spotlighting and underlining of details). The Sixth and (especially) Seventh Symphonies as presented here are among the most convincing available, while the First and Third Symphonies are also recommendable, even if both are marred by tempo and phrasing exaggerations and inflated sonorities. (The finale of the Third may be the slowest on disc, running for 28 minutes--not 25:01 as indicated on the original CD release and accepted without question by critics ever since.) As for the remainder, it's a very mixed bag, despite the (very high) level of commitment Bernstein gets from his orchestras. This performance of the "Resurrection" Symphony reminds me of William Shatner doing one of his indescribable spoken-word records, while the Fifth and Ninth Symphonies take an enervated, depressed, mannered view of these scores, forgetting all about such niceties as momentum. Yes, there is "intensity" here, but it's forced. Tempi, dynamics, expressive markings are either exaggerated and distorted, or else Bernstein blots them out and substitutes his own. The Fourth Symphony here never quite comes together as Bernstein's underrated 1960 version did, and it's worth noting that the Eighth (a 1975 concert from the archives that was pressed into service when Bernstein's death in 1990 prevented DG from completing the series with a newly-minted Eighth) sounds more tired as it goes, and from the outset there are patches where everybody goes off-key.

   The song cycles are also uneven. Thomas Hampson's contributions are fine, but the overblown set of "Wunderhorn" songs completely misses the rusticity and innocence inherent in even the most sardonic songs. (Soloists Andreas Schmidt and the late Lucia Popp have much better work in Mahler than this to their credit.) For "Das Lied von der Erde," DG borrows the 1966 Decca recording (also issued separately on that label) in which Bernstein took the less-common option of two male voices. Unfortunately, one of those voices is Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau at his most histrionic (although his murmurs of "ewig" in the closing bars of "Der Abschied" are as spellbinding as the deathly hush Bernstein casts over the orchestra). However, the overall "sound-world" of this "Das Lied" is closer to Bernstein's CBS set, and unintentionally makes much of the latter-day cycle sound bloated by comparison.

   In and of themselves, these recordings are distinguished, and never, ever dull. Even at their most wrong-headed they make an undeniable impression that you're in the presence of a high-powered musical entity. But what is on display here is rarely the music of Mahler as he composed it.

2 comments about Bach: Brandenburg Concertos; Orchestral Suites.

1. I originally planned on giving this boxed set '2-stars', but decided to rate it with only 1 to offset any unrealistically high ratings. I was not pleased with these interpretations of both Bach's Brandenburgs and his Orchestral Suites. I am usually quite pleased with the work of Andrew Parrott, but not at all in this case. The Brandenburgs are played with too, too much zeal, almost with the same effect as with turning a music box's crank too quickly. The whole 4 CD set has a "squeeeky" quality to it. I think that the quality of Andrew Parrott ends with the works of J.S. Bach. He is excellent "from Monteverdi to Vivaldi" (The title of an exceptional boxed set of his), but not beyond. For both the Brandenburgs and the Orchestral Suites I give my highest recommendation to Christopher Hogwood.



2. This is a great recording - especially the Brandenburg #2 with its incorrigibly insouciant trumpeter. If you're looking for a technically correct version, this isn't it. The Trumpter hits a few sharp notes, but the sheer exuberance of his performance earns your forgiveness forthwith. Lovely lovely version of some of Bach's most beautiful music.

1 comments about Handel: Orchestral Works.

1. This 8-CD Box Set of Handel's Orchestral Works by Neville Marriner and the Academy of St. Martin-in-the-Fields is truly special. Marriner, in many ways one of the leading figures in the authentic-instruments movement before the phrase was even coined, brings a fresh spirit and excitement to these old familiar works. I opted for this set over the comparable slim, paper-sleeved box set from DG/Archiv by Trevor Pinnock and the English Concert because for a little bit more money, you get a lot more music. Both sets of course have the Water Music Suites, Music for the Royal Fireworks, and Concerti Grossi Ops. 3 & 6. But the Marriner set also adds the Organ Concerti, the Oboe Concerti and other nuggets like "Arrival of the Queen of Sheba." As I already own other Pinnock Box Sets, I'm sure musically it and the Marriner are on par, but I am always one to opt for more music as long as the product is of similar quality. If you agree, then you won't be sorry by adding this classic Handel box set to your collection.

2 comments about Music for Creativity.

1. Excellent selection of classical music. I listen to these CD's at work when I can't tune in NPR's Performance Today. Have used as gifts for friends and family ... a great value and always appreciated.



2. This album is superb! The selections chosen, the artists performing, and the choice of sequencing combine to create what I believe to be the finest three CD set of selected (mostly)Baroque music I have ever encountered. It truly is music to encourage a creative state. I am a retired classical music devotee.

5 comments about Berlioz - Les Troyens / Lakes · Pollet · Voigt · Quilico · Courtis · Perraguin · Ainsley · Dutoit.

1. If you want to listen to Les Troyens, the set to get is the 1969 Davis set. Forget the 2001 set, it's too stripped of its drama. The 1969 set is the best ever!!



2. I absolutely love this recording because of the idiomatic and precise enunciation of most of the leads and the gorgeous acoustics of the Church of Ste. Eustache near Montreal.
   For all of the virtues of the recently-released version by Colin Davis, this recording still wears its age VERY well and the conducting of Charles Dutoit is superb and has a certain Berliozian "swagger".
   In conclusion, add this version to the others you may own and you will not be disappointed. I very highly recommend this Montreal Symphony Orchestra version under the inspired conducting of Dutoit and the excellent choral contribution by Ewan Edwards and his superb chorus.

   Timothy Wingate from Ottawa Canada




3. Both in terms of casting and musical performance, this recording cannot be compared to the 2 sets conducted by Colin Davis. The vocal performances here are often unidiomatic and most of the singers are at a loss in respect of the French style. It's an efficient performance, but Berlioz's music deserves more than just an efficient traversal. 2 stars.



4. I love this opera, but have had a hard time finding a recording of it I like. The old Davis set had Jon Vickers as Enee, who was magnificent, but generally plodding tempos and two awful singers in Berit Lindholm and Josephine Veasey. The live Georges Pretre broadcast had a wonderful cast--Marilyn Horne as Cassandra, Shirley Verrett as Dido, Nicolai Gedda as Enee, and Veriano Luchetti as Iopas--but it was abridged. And the new Colin Davis set has bland singing and conducting, which for me puts it out of the running entirely.

   This leaves only two performances to consider, the present recording and the great 1983 Met telecast with Jessye Norman, Placido Domingo and Tatiana Troyanos. The Met video is superb in many ways, but Domingo has to transpose a lot of his music down a semitone because he has no high C, and to me his voice sounds tough and leathery, not thrilling or seductive, and many of the secondary singers (i.e., Paul Plishka well past his prime) are just painful to hear....though it is wonderful to see the whole thing imaginatively staged.

   The present recording has a few weak links, particularly the piticul-sounding Catherine Dubosc as Ascagne, but overall it is strongly cast. Gary Lakes, who I did not like on the Conlon recording of "Oberon," sounds just wonderful here. He only misses one high C, oddly enough the same note that Vickers struggled with in HIS recording; otherwise, his voice is lovely, liquid, full and flowing, perhaps a bit too sweet-sounding for Enee but excellent none the less. Dutoit actually got Deborah Voigt to shade her voice somewhat, which results in a very musical and exciting Cassandra; and Francoise Pollet is a sumptuous Dido, perhaps not as viscerally thrilling as Janet Baker or Troyanos, but revealing a rich, creamy mezzo voice and singing the lyrics with drama and commitment.

   This performance had me on the edge of my seat often, and almost brought me to tears several times. Dutoit conducts his orchestra and chorus with an almost manic intensity that recalls the very best performances of Toscanini and Munch: if he had only made this one recording, I would still rank him as one of the world's greatest conductors. You can't go wrong with this "Troyens," it is simply magnificent in every respect.




5. With the release of Colin Davis' new recording of Les Troyens there are now two superb recordings of this opera. There are bound to be listeners who prefer the new recording but do not discount the Decca effort.

   The Dutoit recording was welcomed with a lot of fanfare when it was issued and it is well sung and recorded. Deborah Voigt as Cassandre and Francoise Pollet as Didon are excellent in their roles. Gary Lakes is good indeed but seemed a little weak on some of his high notes, particularly noticable in the 3rd Act. Also, Catherine Dubose as Ascagne has too much vibrato in her voice when singing in the latter part of the 3rd act that I found distracting.

   Despite these minor complaints, there is much to recommend this disk: the wonderful playing by the Orchestre symphonique de Montreal and their choir being particularly excellent. Many of the supporting singers perform with great depth and beauty. An example is the aria of Hylas in the 5th Act (sung by John Mark Ainsley) whose longing for home is very beautifully sung.

   To sum up, if you are interested in this grand opera of Berlioz, so misunderstood in his lifetime, you will not go wrong with this set.

No comments about Best of George Gershwin.

5 comments about Beethoven: 9 Symphonien.

1. Critics have plenty of room to disagree when a conductor provides them with four versions of every Beethoven symphony, and more than four of the Seventh and Ninth, as Karajan did. He's unique in that regard and probably will remain unchallenged for the foreseeable future. The classical music today market barely allows conductors to make one cycle. Karajan's last set in digital sound has been widely dismissed, but as several reviewers here have noted, it has some unique strengths.
   
   First, the digital sound, especially as remastered in the Karajan Gold edition, is far superior to the flawed analog sound that he got in the Sixties, much less the muddy monaural sound EMI gave him for his first cycle with the Philharmonia in the Fifties. There was a steely edge to early digital, and that remains in this box set before the remastering. Nonetheless, we not only get more clarity, but the Berlin Phil. performs with a sheen and polish that's mesmerizing (unless you simply think it's unacceptable for Beethoven to sound beautiful).
   
   Karajan didn't greatly change his interpretations of any of these works, so if you dislike his glib Pastorale from earlier cycles, here it is again. But also here are his superlative Second, Fourth, Fifth, and Seventh. I find the Eroica seriously underpowered, however, and the Ninth is clearly inferior to all ealier versions, thanks to light voices in the solo quartet and a loss of mystery and emotional depth throughout.
   
   A Beethoven cycle wihtout a great Ninth isn't worthy of five stars, but for many other reasons Karajan's last words on Beethoven are a must-listen.



2. Reviewers often certify that the 1963/4 Karajan/Berliners cycle is far and away the best. I suspect this general opinion is based mostly on their awe for that version of the 9th symphony, and such an opinion is reasonable. The debate rages on, however. I personally think that each of Karajan's recorded cycles was a substantial improvement on the previous version, for two reasons: the steady improvements in recording technology which gave greater transparency to the sound, and the evolution of the interpretation by the most incredible marriage of conductor and ensemble in modern musicmaking history. By the way, there is a fourth cycle by Karajan with the Philharmonia (producer Walter Legge's creation in London, and also led by Klemperer) recorded in the 50s by EMI. It is even swifter than the 60s Berlin version, but not "better."
   
   Karajan's forte was with the 7th and 9th symphonies. They "make" each of the sets, and the last versions could not have conceivably been "better." They are not to be dismissed. They are arguably the best performances ever recorded, ranking with the best performances by Furtwaengler, Walter and Klemperer, his only rivals. (Toscanini was the Horowitz of the symphony orchestra; his creations were of something else, not quite what was intended by the composer -- but that's another story.) Klemperer's "live" 9th from 1961 (on BBC Testament) is, I'd say, the truer, more authentic realization: the 3rd movement remarkably (and perhaps exclusively) up-tempo and musical, the 4th showing its debts to earlier masters (even Haendel) as it forges the modern form.
   
   While Klemperer is unadorned pure music, Karajan is the master of power. When the music demands it, say in Bruckner and Beethoven especially, he is unequalled in creating the maximum effect. His tempi are less flexible than Klemperer's which clearly embrace the dance elements. Instead Karajan can be described as purposeful in his rhythmic progressions, always feeding a larger theme. In the classical terms, Klemperer is more Dionysian; Karajan, more Apollonian. Both approaches result in glorious renditions, never surpassed, only rarely equalled. Bruno Walter's renditions either in mono with the NYPO (Phila. Orch. in the 6th) or in stereo with the Columbia Symphony are arguably as wonderful and definitive as any others, and more subjectively, even lovingly handled. A few of the performances of the handpicked-for-Walter (largely LA Phil) Columbia Symphony Orchestra have been held in diminished regard by some, unfairly I think. Certainly most, I would say all of the Walter/CSO recordings are among the most beautiful recordings of the Romantic repertoire ever made. Perhaps detractors are responding to the close miking employed by CBS, and perhaps because Walter discouraged showy playing some feel they sometimes lack a certain edge when compared to Walter's recordings earlier in life. (Recorded rehearsals show his later recordings were exactly what he wanted from the CSO, not some unintended shortcoming.) It could also simply be the result of comparing an unretouched recording of a top-rate orchestra to the patched-if-necessary perfect recordings of probably the best orchestra ever, the BPO. It should be noted in this regard that the first Karajan/BPO undertakings in the early sixties were not nearly as polished, the orchestra showing it was not so unlike the Philharmonia, NYPO or CSO. Of the Walter/CSO recordings, the least favorite seems to be the Ninth. A couple of missed trumpet notes to mention, and a very slow, or perhaps heavily indulged third movement. The last movement is taken slower than most until the end, but that is not necessarily wrong. I happen to enjoy it. Klemperer was known for "ponderous" tempi, and I disagree with the aspersion. In those days, flashy, edgy interpretations were somewhat frowned upon, which made the renditions by Toscannini stand out all the more. I compare Toscannini unfavorably for what I consider flashy, often bombastic performances. On the other hand, Karajan can be quite slow, say in Mahler compared with Walter; and Klemperer can be quite swift in concert particularly in the 3rd movement of the Beethoven Ninth.
   
   For technical sonic reference, the Karajan/BPO recordings win hands down, and the Walter/CSO recordings are a distant second. The others mentioned suffer from the technical limitations of their times, Furtwaengler's suffering the most, but remain very enjoyable notwithstanding.
   
   These performances are precious, and I hope they remain in the Amazon catalogue for a very long time.



3. This recording shows the mastery of a lifetime of superb conducting by Karajan. The orchsetra is perfectly balanced; the technical execution is top knotch. And the voices are perfect. In my opinion this is still one of the finest symphonies ever written. And this recording by Karajan and the Berlin Philharmonic is one of the best there is.



4. Karajan recorded the complete cycle of Beethovens 9 symphonies no less than three times: first, in the early sixties, next in the mid seventies and finally in the mid eighties, this recording. Karajan was always at the cutting edge of recording techniques. It was only natural for him to be among the first to embrace the new digital technology, that was the basis of the compact disc - incidentally, his "Zauberflöte" (Mozart) became the first DDD recording to be released on CD by the Deutsche Grammophon Gesellschaft. One of the main reasons for Karajan to do no less than three cycles of Beethoven-symphonies was his desire to leave a state-of-the-art legacy on record (or CD), and as he died in 1989, it became a race against time. It is potentially interesting to be able to view the approach to these hallmark works by the same conductor at three stages of his career. Sadly, it is all too obvious that Karajan had nothing to add to the previous cycles. The only advantage is the polished, deluxe sound that comes from the all-digital DDD recording techniques. The music-making itself has an almost rheumatic quality to it - Karajan's approach to Beethoven was always a rather dry, polished one, far from that of his predecessor as "conductor-in-chief" of the BPO, Wilhelm Furtwängler. At this advanced stage of his career, there was hardly anything left but the polished sound and the precise conducting - no joy or life. This is not to say that Karajan wasn't a great conductor. To my mind, he was perhaps the greatest, also as a conductor of Beethoven. But get the recordings he made during the sixties and early seventies, which, I believe was his best period. Many of those recordings - and there are LOTS of them - are available on disc under the "Originals" label by DGG.



5. I'm no fan of Karajan, but even I 'm stunned by these detestable misinterpretations. It doesn't sound like Beethoven. It doesn't even sound like music. It sounds like K. trying (and failing) to create new and interesting orchestral SOUNDS. There is no heart behind it, and no intellect either. Usually I can find something in a bad disk, but who can stay in the room when this stuff is on? It's offensive that K. did this to Beethoven.

   But then K.'s very existence is offensive.

5 comments about The Complete Symphonies.

1. Bruno Walter may yet recapture his due credit as one of the supremely gifted interpreters of the titans of music. He is still recognized as such in particular repertoire, e.g. Brahms and Mahler. Many accept that Walter remains the greatest interpreter of Mahler's music. His recording of Mahler's Ninth with the Columbia Symphony is sublime with a final movement unmatched by anyone. Which just goes to show that this sometimes maligned orchestra is the equal of any.
   
   It is important to make a point about the orchestras handpicked for Walter by Columbia Records (now Sony). The first incarnation, while Walter lived in NYC, was made up of NY Phil and Met players among others. In this Beethoven set and for most of the Columbia Sym recordings, however, we hear mostly players of the LA Phil, as Walter had taken up final residence in Beverly Hills. (The last movement of the Ninth is recorded in NYC, and it is not clear which players are involved there.) While some have nit picked the playing of the CSO in certain recordings from time to time, I find this criticism unwarranted. The CSO gave Walter everything he asked for and much more with often splendid musicality and simply beautiful tones. In this set there are outstanding examples of a superior orchestra in top form for a master. As spoiled as I can be by the Karajan-era Berliners on CD, and by the Philadelphia Orchestra in concerts over more than three decades, I still can appreciate with great pleasure the musicianship of the CSO players and can never hear enough of them.
   
   Nor is it really fair to say, as some have done here, that Walter had slowed or mellowed in his old age. Walter had conducted a very long time, and, like his mentor Mahler, always wanted each performance to be "new". This is evident throughout his career to anyone like me who has listened to most of his recordings spanning it. And his outlook on conducting technique changed over time. While one can say generally that he conducted quicker tempi in his younger, rather youngest years, he later on varied his tempi considerably with the same works from one performance to the next. And not unexpectedly his tempi tended, as with most performers, to be quicker during concerts. But in this Beethoven set we hear what became an evolved standard in his so-called late, or Indian Summer-period recordings for the most revealing detail and for constantly urging his players to make their instruments "Sing, sing!" It is a difference in emphasis, not the difference between tension and gentleness. Perhaps the "gentle" listener needs to listen just a bit more attentively, because the passion is all too evident both from the conductor and the players.
   
   Walter was also the object of a recurring criticism about his erratic baton. As any ensemble musician would know, this is a phony proposition, and Walter's rank among the greatest conductors alone dispels the notion. He was famously admired for his mastery of rubato, and the suggestion this could be so with an incurably erratic baton is nonsense. Enough said, but doubters might watch a rare CBC video of Walter rehearsing the Brahms Second Symphony with the Vancouver International Festival Orchestra in 1958 to resolve any of these criticisms (available as "Bruno Walter, the Maestro, the Man"). It is a truly remarkable document, if all too brief. I would also refer the reader to the recent Erik Ryding biography ("Bruno Walter - A World Elsewhere") which notes, just for example, that the 1960s CSO recording of the Flying Dutchman overture is nearly identical to the Royal Philharmonic recording from the mid-1920s, although many intervening performances were quite different.
   
   This emphasis, then, on letting the detail sing out, essentially allowing the players to be their most naturally musical, provides quite gloriously beautiful results. It is the magic of Walter's baton and the stamp of his vast experience on the interpretation that makes the richness of the music sound so "right" overall and capture the listener so completely -- ensuring that you are able to appreciate those sublime moments when the composer's genius and the player's art are fully mediated. Yes, there are countless moments like these in the entire range of Walter's recordings, not least those with this CSO.
   
   A last word about the criticisms of the Ninth's last movement, which, regardless of your view, is certainly not a reason to overlook these wonderful recordings. One thing I've learned from owning and repeat listening of literally scores of recordings from most of the conductors of Beethoven's Ninth: there is none of them able to claim the mantle of the definitive version or performance. Every great performance of this symphony, including this one by Walter and others like the fiery Walter/LPO concert performance mentioned by another reviewer, is quite differently "correct" in its success. I would mention three other conductors: Furtwaengler in the wild wartime Berlin Phil and the 1951 Bayreuth Festival concerts; Klemperer's concert performances with the Philharmonia in 1957 and 1961 (on BBC Testament; avoid the EMI studio version); and Karajan's recordings with the Philharmonia (EMI) and three times with the Berlin Phil (DGG), each time with better recorded sound, interpretively equivalent albeit with nuanced differences. Only Karajan made comparable complete recorded sets of the Beethoven symphonies, and brought a different mastery to the stage. All of this is to say that this Ninth by Walter and the CSO is decidedly not second rate, rather it is -- even in the last movement -- an authentically glorious rendition worth every penny and much more. It has much to "say" about the music, not to mention some uniquely enchanting moments.
   
   I second the remark by another reviewer that every lover of Beethoven must have Walter's CSO set on the shelf. This is also true of Walter's recordings of Mahler, Brahms, Bruckner, Mozart and the all too few samples of Wagner and Berlioz. Needless to say, listen often with sheer delight!



2. Rather than goading and beating his players sensely Walter was always a gentleman of conductors and was very much old world by the time the 50s came about. Never in a rush, these interpretations balance a view halfway between modern interpretation of Conducting and yet maintains the old world sense of proportion and blend. The Columbia symphony sounds wonderfully European...robust woodwinds out front and a natural unforced balance between winds and brass.
   
   Rather recently I heard the Naxos Tintner set and was very dissapointed with the Beethoven installments..and in No. 4 you simply have to listen to Walter. The warmth and roundness of phrasing and the subtle dovetailing of phrases is an instance where Walter can never be matched. I also dislike the idea of doing Romantic interpretations with Chamber music forces...here the Columbia symphony is around 75 players and yet play with a smooth clean sound that is very delicate...
   
   I have a great admiration for Szell as well and for different reasons...Szell is very clean and more tense generally which works for Beethoven. However, I really think any genuine collector must have Bruno Walter's complete recordings on the "shelf". They are simply great and appeal to the sensibilities of serving the music without fuss.



3. These vintage recordings from the last fifties and early sixties capture all the warmth, insight, and gentle intensity of Bruno Walter's interpretative stance on Beethoven. Textures are clear, inner voices sing, and melodies flow with a gentle and passionate inevitability. The structure of the symphonies (despite the absence of any exposition repeats) unfolds with both clarity and narrative expansiveness. At times, Walter's art reveals a distinctive charm in the handling of rhythm: just note the opening of the second movement of the fourth, the genial ritardtando at the opening of the "Pastoral," or the almost coy viola patterns at the end of the second movement of the eight--absolutely inimitable Walterian timing.
   Charm, however, is not the whole story. The epic grandeur of the "Eroica," the rhetorical gestures of the fifth, and the rhythmic vitality of the seventh all find unique expression in Walter's imagination: his third blends power with pathos, his fifth unites drive with ardent longing, and his seventh seamlessly and paradoxically weds febrile energy with Viennese swing. As for the ninth, the almost operatic passion of the first movement of the ninth, the granite-like strength of the scherzo, and the elysian warmth of the third movement are all unique in the Beethoven discography. Disappointingly, the crowning fourth movement lacks a foward moving structural impetous (how uncharacteristics of this set!); nevertheless, the soulful unfolding of the "Ode to Joy" theme in the strings is very moving. The choir tries to deal with the slow tempi--it seems that Walter is seeking some sort of metaphysical stasis to contrast with the drama of the opening movements--but ultimately, though there are many heart-warming touches, the finale fails to ignite. (This recording could be nicely supplemented by a "live" version of the ninth that Walter made with the London Symphony--what fireworks go off in that performance!!)
   Despite this important blemish, this set of Beethoven symphonies is indispensable to the serious collector--endlessly fascinating in detail, warm in recorded sound, a living portrait of an artist who combined seraphic gentility, clarity of structure, and Dionysian passion to a unique and unrepeatable degree.



4. While there are many historic Beethoven symphony recordings of great merit (Furtwangler, Toscanini, Von Karajan) the Walter recordings (1958-1963) are perhaps the most satisfying overall. Walter takes a decidedly un-modern approach to tempo (SLOW-ER!!) so you hear many things in especially the second, third, seventh and eighth you normally do NOT hear in the more popular brisk tempi of Toscanini, Bernstein or Von Karajan.

   While Von Karajan's Ninth is probably THE gold standard for the greatest of Beethoven's symphonies, overall, the Walter set is important if you want to hear how Beethoven was interpreted before either the technical bravura of the 70's and 80's or the harkening back to "as Beethoven would have heard it if he weren't deaf" attempts of reconstructionists.

   The sound isn't so clean and bright--these were older recordings, but the interpretations never fail to please me. Lots to listen to in this set for lovers of the Titan Beethoven.




5. Bruno Walter believed in music as a moral force, its power to influence for good. His convictions are obvious in these great performances! They glow with generosity of spirit, very much `of the light', full of joy and beauty. No performances of these inexhaustible masterpieces so effectively reveal their beauty, but a beauty that is more than skin-deep. Walter reveals profound depths in the music. The first movement of the 9th is performed with exceptional, monumental strength, (pre-echoes of Bruckner).

   We're privileged to have these recordings. They are in a very real sense beyond criticism; well recorded and sympathetically played by the Columbia Symphony Orchestra. This was an Indian Summer if ever there was!

   Others have valid alternative views, things to add (not least Bruno Walter's contemporary and antipode Otto Klemperer). But Walter's view is indispensable, exceptional, unsurpassed.