Overview of Beethoven Symphony sets - reviews

[Dave2002]

I found this rather decent review of a substantial number of Beethoven symphony recordings just now - http://www.amazon.com/gp/richpub/syl...R1TJMOK4UK4ZUW

I thought it was worth pointing out.

[Gordon]

Thanks. Interesting no Klemperer, Furtwangler, Walter or Toscanini!! Those were the top 4 in the early 60s when I was starting to collect. No Bohm/VPO either, rather fine No6. Karajan 1961/2 was close behind - remember those tokens with each disc that went towards a fancy box to put them all in!! They'd be ruled out nowadays because of age and performance issues not to mention sound quality. How times change and yet many of the ones reviewed here are from the 60s. Yet the Cluytens/BPO is there. I always had a soft spot for the Szell set but it is now sounding a bit hard driven.

Lost count of how many sets I have but must be at least 12!! And loads of odd ones. Must have a sort out.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

It's always interesting to compare Beethoven cycles. I wonder which category Rattle's vibratoless Vienna Philharmonic cycle would be put in?

[amateur51]

Thanks. Interesting no Klemperer, Furtwangler, Walter or Toscanini!! .

No Weingartner, no Mengelberg, no Schuricht!

We live in an age of almost endless opportunities and possibilities

[gurnemanz]

Toscanini!!

Going cheap

[BBMmk2]

Harnoncourt's? Barenboim's?

[Beef Oven!]

Going cheap

Thanks! I bought it. Only got bits and bobs of Toscanini, so this is nice.

Btw, how do you get the link condensed like that?

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

The review did specify a cut-off point, beginning with the stereo era, hence no Weingartner, Toscanini, Mengleberg, Furtwangler, etc.

However, there is a Walter stereo that I greatly admire.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Harnoncourt's? Barenboim's?

Barenboim's Berlin set is #2 in the "big band" list. Strange that Harnoncourt's is missing (and Klemperer's) - but it does seem a quite "outdated" * list: no mention of Krivine, van Immerseel, Chailly or Thielemann.

* = "outdated" only in the sense that there's no set more recent than 2005.

[Gordon]

Going cheap

I assume that is the 1951 set? There are others with NBC from earlier in 1939 that are considered to be better but much more expensive!!

going expensive!

Also a few with the BBC SO from the London Music Festivals of 1935-38 eg:

from Pristine in FLAC but there were other sources on disc like Biddulph and this:

for No 9:

but also available for download in MP3 from Music & Arts here

For EA: Toscanini did just make it into the stereo era but not with Beethoven!!

[Dave2002]

Thanks! I bought it. Only got bits and bobs of Toscanini, so this is nice.

Btw, how do you get the link condensed like that?

I'm guessing that the mp3 encoding isn't going to make the audio sound much worse than it does already - though even then I'd be wary.

Re the links go into Advanced mode and select the word(s) to make into the link, then the link icon - in my browser it's the blue circly thing on the second row. You can then put in the URL to link to - as in the example here which links to Krivine's Beethoven set.

[Beef Oven!]

Re the links go into Advanced mode and select the word(s) to make into the link, then the link icon - in my browser it's the blue circly thing on the second row. You can then put in the URL to link to - as in the example here which links to Krivine's Beethoven set.

I don't understand any of that

Btw, I'm using windows, not my Apple.

[mathias broucek]

To be fair, the writer isn't trying to be comprehensive (even a pro critic would struggle to have the time.)

In some ways it's interesting to see less obvious choices included at the expense of better known examples, even if they are personal favourites (none of Jochum's cycles - grrrr!).

[Gordon]

I don't understand any of that

Btw, I'm using windows, not my Apple.

OK try this then: select any posting with a hidden link in it [like this one!] and click on "reply with quote" then you can see the txt in the posting including what has been done to hide the link.

Example here where you see that the link text that would normally go between the and [see now that this "and" between the URLs has been made red] has been edited with the ="" and the new text thatyou want to appear on the screen - 'for No 9' in this case - hiding the link, comes after the closed bracket that would have closed the first [URL], I have deliberatley left out the very first [ and very last ] to allow the text to show:

URL="http://www.cduniverse.com/search/xx/music/pid/6811937/a/arturo+toscanini+conducts+beethoven+symphony+no.+9 .htm"]for No 9[/URL

So now you know what the text format should be when you want to hide a link, just paste it between the and in the usual way and then edit it by hand. Simples!!

[Beef Oven!]

OK try this then: select any posting with a hidden link in it [like this one!] and click on "reply with quote" then you can see the txt in the posting including what has been done to hide the link.

Example here where you see that the link text that would normally go between the and [see now that this "and" between the URLs has been made red] has been edited with the ="" and the new text thatyou want to appear on the screen - 'for No 9' in this case - hiding the link, comes after the closed bracket that would have closed the first [URL], I have deliberatley left out the very first [ and very last ] to allow the text to show:

URL="http://www.cduniverse.com/search/xx/music/pid/6811937/a/arturo+toscanini+conducts+beethoven+symphony+no.+9 .htm"]for No 9[/URL

So now you know what the text format should be when you want to hide a link, just paste it between the and in the usual way and then edit it by hand. Simples!!

I am even more confused than before, but thanks very much for trying to get me to understand. I will just have to use longer shortened URLs