Trumpets and Timpanis on these recording are period instruments. The reason for this hybridization is that they tend to project less than their modern counterparts, meaning that they can play loud dynamics without totally overwhelming the orchestra, which makes for an important part of the very exciting quality of this cycle. Germany is seeing more and more of these hybrid orchestras where brass players will tend to play period instruments when playing classical/early romantic music. I thought you’d like to know! :)
When I started buying classical recordings I got the impression that Harnoncourt’s cycle with the COE was seen as a new benchmark. But it isn’t new anymore even If it sounds very fresh.
Same! I never hear it mentioned, wonder what the consensus is nowadays. It was my introduction to Beethoven's symphonies and I just thought it was the most incredible thing ever, twenty plus years ago. I'll have to go back and relisten to it one of these days, now that I've spent considerable time with other recordings.
I was in love with this when it was first released but rarely listen to it these days, pushed to the back of the shelf. I too wonder what the opinion of it is these days. I’ll ask Dave.
I was introduced to the Beethoven symphonies by Josef Krips, whose recordings will always be my personal reference recordings, but I think they are about 75 years old, so hardly new.
Actually saw their performance of the fourth movement of the eroica on RU-vid. The orchestra had so much swag.. like it was so visually appealing that I fell in love with the performance. incredibly light and playful.
That Järvi/DKB cycle and the Vänska/Minnesota Orchestra cycle are the two I have. They are both so well played I see no reason to spend any more money on Beethoven symphonies...for now!
How large is the Minnesota Orchestra. For some reason it feels in between a large orchestra and a small orchestra like DKB. Maybe it is the way Vanska conducts/interprets the cycle but it feels very nice but not as imposing than some others orchestras even modern ones like Pittsburg and Honeck.
This new series is quite welcome: it's quite hard for artists these days to make an impact and for their work to be recognized. There's just too much being recorded, and gems can pass us by so easily (the SWR Dvorak cycle is an example). Incidentally, I would have expected Chailly's Beethoven cycle over Järvi's.
This was a good call. I didn't even know it existed. It violates one of your criteria...I wouldn't call it readily available since it is a Japanese Import. But I went to Spotify and sampled the Eroica and not only is the tempo the fastest I've heard...but it has a certain additional momentum that is very exciting indeed. I will try to collected all nine based on your tip (to go with a half dozen other sets of the nine). Actually, Dave I've been doing this about 12 years longer than you have and I have all the old PDFs of High Fidelity and Stereo Review , read Gramophone and speak fluent German...I've also been a trained conductor for 64 years...though I earned my living as an engineer in manufacturing. But I did not live to work...I worked to live...and living was being a classical audiophile starting in 1958 (when my equipment aspirations were greater than my budget). I particularly enjoy your REFERENCE series because it is a consensus...and, as such, I already own about 90% of your Reference List.
I WISH the modern(ish) reference could be Dohnányi/Clevelenad. But it seemed hardly noted when it came out, it's disappeared from print, and it's not HIP...
Dohanyi/Cleveland had the perfect sound didn't they? I come back to a few conductor/orchestra pairings -- Blomstedt/San Francisco (I had subscriptions for 10 years in SF), Munch/Boston, Walter/Columbia Symphony Orchestra, Marriner/St. Martins for example -- I know nothing about classical music (I wish I took more classes in it way back), but somehow, these pairings always sound pefect no matter what they play.
Based on this video, I listened to the Jarvi Bremen Beethoven 5th for first time. Unbelievable performance - no question. What amazed me most was how it reminded me of Toscanini and NBC back in the 50’s. If it wasn’t for the clearly superior technology available today compared to the mono recordings of yesteryear, when I closed my eyes, the “crispness” of the performance and the spirited tempo was so Toscanini to me. I’m an experienced classical music listener with a pretty good ear, but I am not often able to quickly identify a conductor based on sound alone. The one exception is Toscanini. I am not good at expressing myself with musical terminology, but something about a Toscanini performance just leaps out to me. I call it crispness, for want of a more technical term - the orchestra’s stop/starts are just so “crisply” performed and the Toscanini’s tempos are usually quite brisk, but never sound like he is late to catch a train home. I hope Maestro Jarvi would be pleased to be favorably compared to one of the titans of conducting. A great choice for modern reference work, Dave.
I concur with you in general about Toscanini. However, the Beethoven performances I admire are from different decades and concerts. The 5th Symphony- I heard a concert performance with the BBC from the late 30’s that was stunning! What a statement that symphony made through Toscanini & the BBC! Electrifying! I can easily mark the time I “discovered” Toscanini. Was listening to a radio program from NYC back in the late 60’s and the host played 3 different recordings of the famous opening of the Beethoven 5th. No announcement of orchestra or conductor. He wanted the audience to hear 3 different approaches. Upon conclusion of the 3 openings, I knew immediately which one I thought was the “best.” Simply made an impact on me more than the other 2. The performance I liked the best turned out to be Toscanini! It was so visceral! Unfortunately, my memory fails me today as to who conducted the other 2 openings. Damn. Really not saying it was the “best.” Simply saying it was different and powerful and made the biggest impact on me as a listener.
Thank you for putting a spotlight on more actual recordings, Dave! Since not only the recording business, but also Zeitgeist is changing constantly I find it hard to accept some 50 years+ old recordings of the famous symphony-cycles as THE BEST or THE REFERENCE, when at the same time you barely find a conductor/orchestra in todays concert halls that interprets/sounds somewhat like Klemperer/Philharmonia or Szell/Cleveland or Karajan/Berlin. I'm grateful to get to hear your opinion on recent recordings that reflect todays concert realities. Keep on vloging!
I used to own two period cycles out of the 22 I own (not counting scads of individual symphonies) but gave both of them away. That includes one that was highly regarded (Harnoncourt) but I found that I simply wasn't returning to them. I gravitate to modern instrument cycles though several are period influenced.
This is indeed a great recording. In general terms, the best appreciated effect of the infamous HIP in this over recorded works, is the faster tempos, at least for me. I mostly enjoy that in the last movement of the fifth. Actually, an older recording that uses a fast tempo there, is the one you have recommended several times, a live recording with Szell made for the Orfeo label. That one made me doubt if Kleiber's was the best. Well, I would think Kleiber's is the reference recording for Beethovens's Fifth but as you have pointed out, a reference recording is not always the one that a particular person would consider the best.
I suppose if we take it into the age of RU-vid, the reference would be Blomstedt's absolutely gorgeous first cycle from 1980. It's literally the first result lol. And why not? That's how I got introduced to them, and it still holds up really well. Although I'm not so keen on the version of the 9th he did in that cycle, same thing with the more recent one from a few years back. I've leaned more on Bernstein's 1979 9th, and after watching one of your video's, Fricsay's 9th.
I admire your flexibility. For your usual criterion of a reference recording -- a popular and critical consensus that this one is the best -- you substitute what's au courant in today's buying and listening habits; this turns out to be HIPs. And Jävi's cycle is the best of the HIP Beethoven cycles.
On U2B there is/was a monumentally splendid Eroica from a concert recorded in Japan with the Deutsche Kammerphilharmonie Bremen and Paavo Järvi. All instruments were moderns except for the natural trumpets (I can't recall about the horns). The timps were struck by solid oak ( or, whatever the wood would be :--)). I always love the sound of those open trumpets but of course we had to deal with the original trumpet parts; oy). Your choice here is a good one I think, but it wouldn't have occurred to me to select a HIP performance.
This, unlike many like it, is actually consistently a pleasure to listen to, not just an, "interesting" version of the works. With larger forces but still the influence of HIP another cycle that would work well would be Chailly's with Gewandhaus, however you mentioned you wanted a smaller ensemble so I love the Järvi choice.
If Simax was a more widely known label, the Dausgaard Beethoven cycle with the Swedish Chamber Orchestra would certainly be a contender for modern reference. It is available on streaming platforms but the way they designed and organized the discs make it a real hassle trying to find which disc has which symphony in it. But the performances are spectacularly executed, period performance influenced and the inner details clearly heard without distorting the balances grotesquely. Right up there with Paavo Jarvi but with more music including all the overtures, piano concertos and other orchestral works too.
Big thanks to @deepnosepicker for uploading this entire cycle to RU-vid twelve years ago. It certainly served as my reference when I was first getting into Beethoven as a teenager, and many of its stylistic traits have stuck with me ever since and feel fundamental to this music-some ‘historically informed’, some more aligned with 19th/20th century aesthetics.
I'm working my way through this cycle (symph 3 & 8). Currently they are clear, swift and intense. This sounds so far like Beethoven dialed to 11 ( As Nigel Tufnel would say). It might become fatiguing after a while. I think I'll try some of the other slow movements.
Subjectivity will of course rear its ugly head in considering this. Here’s one: For decades, Bernstein’s old Rhapsody in Blue with himself as pianist on Columbia was touted in the press as the reference. Personally, I think it’s a dog - all those push me, pull you tempos, for one thing… and mind you, I’m a fan of LB.
You’re costing me money, David. I just listened to the Hans Schmidt-Isserstedt cycle. I had long known and loved his Ninth (best vocal quartet ever) but was stunned by the series as a whole. And the reason was his careful approach to phrasing. I felt like I was hearing a master class on how Beethoven built these symphonies. Yes, the early music movement has important things to say, but careful attention to detail still matters to me. I plan to hear out Jarvi, but he has a mountain to climb to convince me.
Dave, a few of us were wondering about the current consensus on the Harnoncourt COE cycle from the 90’s, which we thought would be the new reference at the time. Like others here, I rarely return to it these days.,
Thank you for explaining what are / were considerations to pick up PJ /DKB as a new reference set. -- However, as said in one comments here - what would LvB say about all these performances. And it is even not about that: Cervantes did not consider Don Quijote as his main work. So, it is all about (by music critics as well) orchestras, conductors and their craft skills (and recording quality). I understand, without performing and interpretation there is no music, but what I miss is talk about compositors and their intentions and work (what they have done aesthetically). Without that all the talk about references and so on is just showcase what we are as consumers. -- LvB is not just a (unique) person, composer, Vienna classic (one of the greats) etc. He is an epoch in "classical music" (as Haydn and Mozart). And as I get it, it is very rare thing to happen, when somebody is able to catch and express LvB spirit, both as a person and as a composer (even Haydn and Mozart would not understand him, not to mention romantics - Schubert and Liszt included - and all who come after). It is even more the case with all his symphonies as one whole. To be able to do that one should be a musical genius as well. -- I appreciate what you do and are doing in your channel!
Very interesting, I think David Zinman with Zürich also had a shout. But Järvi is definitely a classic, a friend of mine played the Double Bass in the orchestra for some of these recordings
Two, somewhat contradictory, comments. First, I would suggest that a modern reference recording be available in a high-definition digital format. I was just listening to the Dvorak 6th you recently recommended, which was a very nice performance, and then to the Jarvi Mendelssohn Scots Symphony, and the sonics were so much better in the high def Jarvi. Second, I suspect we are too siloed to reach consensus. Some people still get physical product, but I suspect a lot more stream and a few download. Apple Music people have different recordings available than Qobuz, than Amazon Music, etc. I'm not seeing much promotion of anything.
I’ve always had mixed feelings about this cycle. The orchestra is one of the most elegant, technically consistent, perfectly balanced in the classical music scene. My criticism goes to the direction of Jarvi which I find too frantic and anxious. Herreweghe and Abbado (live) are my favourite ones of the last 25 years.
I think you have a point to make about PJ. What you are saying (too frantic and anxious) is just surface - his problems with LvB are much deeper (as everybody`s else). And HIP does not help by that (quite the opposite). -- I would put it this way: to like and understand Schiller is not enough for Goethe. And I am not sure, if PJ gets Schiller (and Haydn) either.
I understand what you are saying here and I agree. I do very much like Jarvi's work here. But, just want to say that I still prefer the old consensus -- Szell.
I'm delighted to see the Jarvi/DKB cycle get some extra hype. Their 4th in particular was a revelation for me: they absolutely rip through the thing at Warp 9 and yet somehow keep the clarity and lean, athletic purpose of the piece without it turning into a speedy muddle. It's stunning, it's absolutely a benchmark, and I i have no idea how they did it. And indeed, if one wanted one leaner, punk rock Beethoven cycle for everyone to settle on - and that's a big if - I can't think of one that's better. Not to say it couldn't be done, though! E.g., I still don't think anyone's yet figured how to do a convincing 9th in this style, save maybe the Scherzo - not even the DKB. It's hard to make punk rock sound big. So maybe the "new" reference is still to come, once someone can square that circle?
I agree! I think, though, that idea of traditional vs. modern Reference Recordings should stop at Beethoven or Schubert… Styles of Baroque and Classical orchestral performance have evolved so much… Klemperer or Richter can’t be compared to Gardiner. Nor should Szell, Klemps or Karajan be compared w Järvi’s (no matter what, I still want the trumpets at the end of the 1st mvt. Of the Eroica!). The goals are too different. However, I have little desire to hear Brahms or Schumann, and anything later in the OI style… (now they are even doing Mahler with “original instruments’…) Please stop!
Klemperer definitely understood something crucial about Bach Gardiner is just incapable of. Gardiner's Bach is the man who loved women and wine, and that may be one aspect of Bach the man, but hardly the prominent part of his music
Mahler on period instruments? Seriously? I had recordings of Brahms on period instruments (by Roger Norrington) which were disposed of a long time ago, and I thought that they made no sense whatsoever-- they took the Romantic out of the Romantic period of music. .
@@falesch Not kidding, it's by Les Siècles. But in fact, I'm getting aware that all discs of Rautavaara, Penderecki, ... I have can be considered to be HIP.
I have 23 complete Beethoven symphony cycles in my collection and my standout favourite is the Deutsche Kammerphilharmonie Bremen set led by Paavo Järvi.
Great set. I own it, love it, love the fact that it is on SACD, also saw the documentary and video performances. I may be mistaken, but I recall hearing the vynil version is Michael Fremer's reference as well.
Period instrument performance has surged worldwide over the last 50. In the UK, another performance innovation has recently appeared on the horizon. The Aurora Orchestra under the baton of Nicholas Collon sometimes performs from memory before large audiences. I have not attended a live Aurora concert where playing from memory was the order of the day. However, I have watched videos. All members (with a few exceptions) stand and, instead of focusing on reading music, respond to the conductor and fellow musicians. My eyes may be overriding my ears, but I respond quite positively to this approach. What do my fellow classical music lovers think? Is this a meaningful innovation, a party trick, or something in between?
Dave is already right. One point of criticism though. Isn't it a bit too smooth and not sounding urgent enough? Not like I feel the pregnancy of genius of the composer in there. But I'm not Dave and go with my feelings too much too
