Dear Tam,

I don't have the LSO Live versions of 5 and 6, having been put off by slightly lukewarm reviews when they appeared, and in any case I'm happy enough with the RCA versions of these. So why spend the money? I purchased 3 and 7, though, because I had felt slightly disappointed with the RCA 7th, and because there seems to be a slight flaw in my copy of the RCA 3rd -- not enough to stop the disc playing, but enough to be off-putting. But I find that I prefer the later performances of these two, anyway. The LSO Live disc of Sibelius 3 and 7 is, I reckon, terrific.

I'll be interested to see what eventually emerges as a new Davis version of 4, however. The RCA 4th is another I thought would be better than I think it actually is, as a few years previously I'd listened to Davis conducting this, on the radio (while I did the washing-up). That struck me as a fantastic performance, and I hope he can repeat it in due course.

David

Well, last night saw the finale of the series that sparked this thread. What a shame it was not the valedictory that might have been hoped for.

Conductor Leif Segerstam was on duty for symphonies 5, 6 and 7. Things did not start especially well, there was something about the opening of the 5th that wasn't right but on which I struggled to put my finger on. Certainly it was painfully slow - running around 40 minutes. This is fine enough if you are Leonard Bernstein and can conjour the unique sonic pictures he manages with the VPO. Segerstam couldn't. It also seems he is certainly his pupil's (Solyom) teacher - in that his sense of orchestral balance is very poor. Paricularly the wonderful theme on the strings in the closing bars which was completely washed out. Similarly to his pupil, he also seems to equate volume with balance (indeed, at places in the 7th it was painfully loud). The second movement suffered from similar problems and more - the big themes don't really ever seem to emerge at all - there is no sweep or flow at all. Indeed, he seemed not to quite be in control of things, not least in the way he jerked through the transition into the finale. Which suffered horribly from 'Mahler 9 syndrome' (namely the way in which that work can, in the wrong hands, seem horribly like a series of disjointed minatures - I would never imagined it possible to do this to Sibelius). He builds no tension, no themes. The final chords utterly underwhelm. Still, the audience by and large seem to disagree (and I once again wonder if having heard so many fine readings on disc makes it impossible to enjoy lukewarm performances).

However, the 6th was some way below lukewarm. Balance was if anything, more of an issue (the more subtle moments are not allowed through). This is compounded by extraordinary sloth (again running in at close to 40 minutes). Both the first and second movements end in an almost commical manner in a kind of - you're kidding, that surely wasn't the last chord - way. In some bad readings, at least one now and again gets the wonderful Sibelian themes and things 'this is more like it'. But Segerstam never allows them to emerge. The big themes are fumbled so badly. There is no bite or tension to what should be the exciting vivace of the third movement which ends with the most bizzare climax coming deafeningly out of nowhere. In the 4th movement it became clear to me that his problem was rather more profound than a poor sense of orchestral balance - he had a total lack or orchestral control - the big climaxes in this movement should not sound like a cacophony in this sort of a way. The beauty of the movement's opening is utterly lost.

However, it was the 7th that was possibly the most disappointing of all. Perhaps because I had fond memories of a wonderful concert from Oramo and the CBSO. The opening bars displayed some of the poorest orchestral playing I have heard in some years. The various instruments were all over the place. In fairness to them they recovered slightly in the next few minutes and for a moment I wondered if this would turn out to be the evening's highlight. It was not. When the trombones first entered, there was something awfully funny in the balance within the section. The faster moments (though this is a rather relative term as there was not nearly enough contrast in tempi) did not work at all. Again it suffered horribly from Mahler 9 issues and the cacophony of the 6th. The sense of journey's end towards the end was utterly absent. The lack of balance was debilitating - towards the end the strings drowned the trombones utterly (and the music was painfully loud). There textures were awful too - there is a string theme that has a wonderful 'icy wind' feel in the best readings, in Segerstam's hands it sounded like rather dull scales played badly. When he paused it was worse - comically bad even, there seemed no reason to it (other perhaps than to further butcher the music). The final chords had little impact (though the audience seemed rather to have enjoyed this one too).

Segerstam conducts in an oddly lacklustre way - indeed one wonders if he is past it, but a quick google shows him barely over 60. Perhaps its his weight, but the energy with which Mackerras (some 20 years his elder) strides to the podium and then conducts rather puts him to shame. Segerstam merely waddles there and one almost wonders if he will be able to climb onto the podium. His gestures hardly change at all with the music and he never seems to direct the players. Not a huge matter mind, since they never seem to be paying him the slightest bit of attention. In a way it makes me appreciate Solyom more - he may of lacked the nuance of balance but he did not lack for enthusiasm and his BBC Scottish was not all over the place in the same way.

I am in awe at Segerstam's ability to make this music so un-visual and so un-evocative. It amazes me that he has recorded them all twice (at least now I know I need not bother checking them out).

All in all a rather disappointing series, why could they not have engaged some of the fine Sibelians based in this country - Oramo or Davis! When the broadcasts make it to R3 (late January) the 3rd and Kullervo with Vanska are an absolute must. Volkov's 4th is well worth hearing. But less so the rest.


regards, Tam

I just thought I'd bump this thread. For two reasons (sadly, neither of which is that I've listened to any more Sibelius), firstly because I hope soon to complete it and wanted to prevent it getting locked as it will shortly. Secondly, the BBC Scottish concerts which left me largely unimpressed (save for Vanska's magic) are on Radio 3 soon (with the Discovering Music at 2pm on Saturday 20th and the concerts to follow in Performance on 3 from the 22nd - the Vanksa concert, my highlight is on the 23rd).

Davis was to be up next, but I recently stopped by my local CD shop and picked up a 15 disc box from BIS (which can be had for under £60), titled the Essential Sibelius which contains, among other things, the Vanska cycle of the symphonies along with Kullervo so that has jumped ahead in the queue.


regards, Tam

quote:

The programme was Tapiola, I don't really know Tapiola well, so it is hard to judge, but while the orchestra played well enough (and the accoustic of the hall seems very fine indeed) there seemed to be something missing.

I'm listening to this on R3's "listen again" having missed the broadcast. Tapiola was featured in "Discovering music" a few weeks ago, and I've been playing it on a daily basis ever since, so I feel qualified to comment.

The major problem with Volkov’s interpretation was a total lack of feeling for the piece. He seemed to want to get through it as quickly as possible, losing the sense of vast emptiness that the work portrays. A real botched job.

If you want a better idea of what Tapiola is all about, try Karajan’s recording. There are two to choose from, one on EMI from the mid 70’s and DGG from ’84, I have both and would recommend the earlier EMI version but there isn’t much in it.

p.s.

I agree, Volkov was much better with the 4th symphony.

Another bump before it gets locked!

On impulse I bought a CD of Mariss Jansons with the Oslo Philharmonic playing the third and fifth symphonies.

Breathtaking, simply breathtaking!

Unfortunately he only seems to have recorded the 2nd, 3rd and 5th.

Dear Basil,

There was a rather discouraging review of the recent 2nd from Jansons with the Concertgebouw (on their own label). It suggested that the four or five months that separated the various concerts it was spliced together from had done it no favours.

That said, Jansons has impressed me when I've heard him, so I shall have to look out for the disc of three and five (is it one of his Chandos recordings?).


As far as Karajan goes, I haven't heard any of his Sibelius (and to be absolutely honest I've not in the past been all that keen on some the few of his recordings I own - that said, I've liked very much what I've heard of his Strauss). That said, I would still be very interested to hear some of his Sibelius.


regards, Tam

Dear Tam,

The Jansons Sibelius 3 & 5 is on EMI - 7243 - 5 55533 - 2.

Superb sound and an even better performance.

Seeing as we seem to agree about the Volkov performance of Tapiola (and the 4th symphony), I'm hopeful you will enjoy Karajan.

Dear Basil,

The Karajan (the DG reading, as it came coupled with the symphonies 4-7) and the Jansons (a two disc set that also has the 2nd and one or two fillers), so I shall report back in due course:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sibelius-Symphonies-Nos-4-7-Jea...9000?ie=UTF8&s=music

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sibelius-Tone-Poems-symphonies-...2058?ie=UTF8&s=music


regards, Tam

Dear Tam,

A word of caution, the Karajan Tapiola you've ordered is the 1964 recording, which I've never heard and therefore cannot recommend.

My first choice would be the EMI recording

P.S

I see you found a performance of the second symphony with the Oslo philharmonic, I'm very much looking forward to reading your thoughts about it.

Keep well

Steve

Dear Basil,

The Tapiola turned up this morning (along with the Jansons disc). So far I have only listened to Tapiola, but it really is very fine indeed (possibly the finest I've yet heard). If the rest of the set lives up to a similar standard I may have to investigate the EMI disc as well.

regards, Tam

I'm glad you're pleased, I was a little concerned when you posted the links and I saw you'd ordered the 1964 recording, as I'm completely unfamiliar with it.

Looks like I may have to track down a copy!

I'll start by putting my cards on the table - I am no great fan of Karajan - in the past the few of his recordings I have owned haven't moved me much and I have often found them a little over-regimented and lacking in passion. I did not, therefore, intend to sample his Sibelius, despite the good reviews it has got. However, Basil's strong recommendation for his Tapiola, coupled with the fact I haven't really heard a reading of the piece that grabbed me, prompted me to do. And I'm very glad that I did.



The two disc set contains symphonies 4-7, along iwth Tapiola and The Swan of Tuonela (if one goes to his earlier EMI recordings symphonies 1 and 2 can be found, but I haven't noticed a recording of the 3rd - others may be able to put me right).

From the opening bars of the 4th, one of the hallmarks of this set is clear - the exceptional playing of the BPO. While this is not one of Sibelius's really sweeping scores, Karajan brings a good measure of it. As well as a wonderful contrast between light and dark moments. The transition to the second movement is judged to perfection. There is a very nice lightness of touch, even if other interpretations do dance a little more. I like the way he brings out an omnipresent sense of darkness in the background. Another excellent transition into the third movement, and what strikes most is how well he brings out the similarities to the first movement, giving the work a sense of structure which in lesser hands it can lack. (There is also some particularly fine wind and brass playing.) They stylistic differences of the 4th movement don't feel out of place at all (as they often can). Splitting hairs, I would prefer an ounce more passion here. But Karajan does bring off the ending wonderfully, in a way that is both satisfying and disconcerting. All in all, one of the finer readings of the work.

The 5th opens fairly slowly, once again with exquisite playing. But, as a general rule, I prefer this movement slightly brisker and the fire, while it is there, does feel slightly calculated. None of which detracts from a particularly fantastic final few bars. The beautiful andante that follows is much better suited to Karajan's approach. The finale is pretty fine too. Karajan brings a wonderful energy and the playing is exceptional (though different, I should note, to Bernstein's Vienna Phil who bring a level of texture which Karajan doesn't, however, that has it's own costs, discussed above). The whole thing builds to a pretty magnificent close.

As might be expected by now, the 6th has a beautifully measured opening, but there is darkness on hand. But, listening, I detect more than elsewhere in this set the over-regimentedness I dislike about Karajan, and as I felt with some moments in the 4th, the brisker passages don't dance as they might. None the less, this is a compelling account (assisted by the BPO's fine playing). As elsewhere, the transition into the second movement, which is very well played, is managed wonderfully and here, for the first time, the orchestra really seem to dance. The third movement again showcases his exquisite lightness of touch coupled with a real fire. There is a wonderful weight to the opening bars of the finale. The orchestra beautiful as ever (though never quite as evocative as the VPO under Bernstein). There is a potent mix of fire and beauty on display here which, all in all, is rather splendid.

It's probably getting a little repetitive to say so by now, but the opening bars of the 7th are very well played indeed, though rather slowly (the reading weighs in at just over 23 minutes which on the face of it is a little long, though not of Bernsteinian or Segerstam proportions - and it doesn't feel wayward in the same way either of those do). I mentioned Mahler 9 syndrome earlier (wherein this piece can, in the wrong hands sound like a disconnected series of miniatures), if anything Karajan brings the reverse and the seamlessness of his reading makes it very special indeed (which makes me think I ought to seek out his Mahler 9th). The playing of the brass (and in particular the all important trombones) deserve special praise. The relative sloth (and, in truth, that word is perhaps unkind, since I don't mean its negative connotations) doesn't prevent the orchestra from dancing when called for (though it could be more, particularly in the vivacissimo section - but to some extent I am probably splitting hairs). There is fire a plenty in the louder moments and he gets a really Bernsteinian chill from his . The slower moments have a really wonderful weight to them. It is true that in the quick passages, he does not quite bring the same sweep as Davis. There is a real quality to the orchestra's quiet playing (one of the things I think marks the distinction between good and great ensembles), there is a wonderful fierceness to the brass. The 'journey's end' (at least that's how it feels to me) motif in the final allegro is satisfying to near perfection (though perhaps a touch quicker than I would like it). The string playing in the closing adagio is superb, as are the trombones. Karajan perhaps goes a little slowly for my tastes, but he sustains it. The closing bars are more satisfying and vivid than any I have heard before (and it does slightly make me wish I had the score before me, as I wonder if he is drawing out the last note longer than he ought - not that I'm complaining mind).

As to the couplings, the Swan is very pleasant. And Tapiola, the reason for buying this set? I still don't entirely feel like I understand this work, but Karajan brings me closer than anyone else I've heard - in a cliche I feel like I begin to understand, and doubtless the more I listen to this fine reading, the more I will.

So, in summary, I think sampling some Karajan is a must for Sibelians and am indebted to Basil for the very fine performances of 4 and 7 (the stars, though 5 and 6 are very fine too), for best Tapiola I've heard to date and for turning me around somewhat on Karajan.

regards, Tam

Excellent! I'm pleased you enjoyed them.

Tam and Basil, those 1960s Sibelius recordings are rightly famous and amongst the best things that Karajan ever recorded. I don't think that the 1980s(?) re-makes on EMI were, so far as I remember, improvements.

Sadly, it was all too often the case with Karajan's recording career that each successive 're-make' took the listener ever further from the work in question and closer to the 'Karajan experience'.

It's a horrible thing to say but, if he'd gone down in an aeroplane crash in around 1968, his reputation today would be higher than it stands now: viz Guido Cantelli.

Regards

Graham

PS Tam, have you ever heard Karajan's 'Ring'? I do keep hearing good things about it, but it would be expensive to get just on a whim.

quote:

Originally posted by graham55:
PS Tam, have you ever heard Karajan's 'Ring'? I do keep hearing good things about it, but it would be expensive to get just on a whim.

Those were pretty well my thoughts exactly Graham. But I just headed over to Amazon, and they had it for £50 (which given I've seen it going for normally more like £150 seemed like a bargain), so I threw caution to the wind and will report back in due course.


regards, Tam

In my view the finest recording of Tapiola is the one done by Prof. Robert Kajanus in 1930 or 1932 when Sibelius was asked to select the best leader of his music for a Finish State sponsered recordings of his music at the EMI studios with the LSO.

It is dark, brooding, monumental and completely terrifying as music. It used to be available on Finish EMI, Finlandia [Finish], and Koch. The two Finish issues come in a wonderful transfer [done in London in the '70s by AC Grifith for the English branch] and the Koch is from Shellac, and is not so fine. The performance still wins! Probably the Koch is still out, and possibly the Finlandia. [I think Naxos may have it in the pipe line as well, but I don't know about the couplings on these].

In each issue you also get Symphonies One, Two, Three and Five. Only Five has a few fairly serious deficiencies in the playing. The Third is my favourite recording of any Sibelius Symphony, and will provide a surprise, which I will not spoil for listeners not aquainted with Sibelius' own ideas of how the music ought to go. Needless to say the tradition has indeed moved away from Sibelius' ideal with such conductors as Karajan, but Barbirolli is still ideally central to the original concept.

But in terms of Tapiola, this is just as surpriing and special. I used to have the Karajan DG recordings on LP. I have not sought them out on CD. It is a question of taste, and once you find the old Kajanus set you will wonder how it could go any other way. It is the closest to a composer performance we shall have, and very special.

Kindest regards from Fredrik

What is the sound like on those 1930's recordings? I feel Tapiola in particular needs a good quality recording with a silent background. Something I've never heard from a 30's recording.

The EMI based transfers are surprisingly fine, and among the quietest in terms of surface noise I have ecountered, except the Second Symphony which is not quite so quiet.

I fact I have never noriced the recording in Tapiola, so powerful is the performance!


ATB from Fredrik

Dear Fredrik,

A quick search has turned this up,

CATALOGUE NR: 27801
RECORD LABEL: Divine Art Historic
FORMAT: CD
PRICE: £ 11.75 including VAT, or £ 10.00 excluding VAT
RELEASE DATE: 11-Apr-2005

COMPOSER: Jean Sibelius
TRACKS: Symphony No.5 in E flat op.82. Tapiola op.112. Symphony No.6 in D minor op.104.
ORCHESTRA: London Symphony Orchestra and Finnish National Orchestra
CONDUCTOR: Robert Kajanus and Georg Schneevoigt

Based on your reputation, and having confirmed that it is Kajanus conducting Tapiola I've gone ahead and ordered it.

You'd better hope I like it!

I hope you do. Sibelius approved, but I did not find that out till after I did more research after finding it for myself! The performance of ythe Fifth under Kajanus is problematic. It shows serious signs of strain in the orchestra in terms of accurate ensemble, not found elsewhere in his recordings. I would guess that it was under-rehearsed, which is important in what was new music for the band.


ATB from Fredrik

PS: Please do report on the perfprmance of the Sixth as well. I have never come across Schneevoigt at all, but had only heard of him.