BaL 5.10.24 - Brahms: Symphony 1

[cloughie]

Did it get your goat though (or is that an expression that hasn't migrated across the pond)?

(What does it mean in your context, btw?)

Let's not mix up someone 'getting your goat' (ie annoying you) with GOAT in this newer American context presumably from text speak and social media use.

[makropulos]

Some of the above posts trouble me, not least because they come from people who did not listen to the programme nor seemed to have played catch-up. Katy Hamilton provided reasons for her choice of the three 'finalists' and her choice of Y N-S at the end of the day was, by her admission, a very close run thing. I thought that she was going to opt for Karajan rather than Mackerras but it could easily have been the other way round so, in a sense, the winner was a bit of a compromise. That it happens to be a recent release is surely neither here nor there. The inference that the BBC has been influenced by a record company (or for that matter the presenter equally pressed to choose a recent recording), without there being any hard evidence to support it, feels just a bit grubby and Trumpian to me but maybe it's my exquisite sensibilities to blame. I can't see Radio Three Sam being very impressed.

They trouble me too, above all because they are extremely misleading. As somebody who has done several BALs, I say with absolute clarity that I have never been given any kind of editorial 'steer' in terms of who the 'winners' might be, or what vintage of recordings to choose. For instance, there were no grumbles when I picked Clemens Krauss (1950) for Die Fledermaus a couple of years ago – nor any suggestion that I might prefer a more recent one instead. I think I've explained the process before, but it deserves saying it again: when someone is asked to do a BAL, their first task is to sift through available recordings in order to select up to 15 recordings, a list of which are then sent to the producer. From that, nearer the time of the broadcast, the reviewer (nobody else) is then asked to get that down to a maximum of 10 versions which can be illustrated in the programme. At no point is there any interference, editorial or otherwise, from the BBC – let alone from a record company. The choice is entirely down to the reviewer. That's been my unvarying experience over several years of doing these things, and I'm sure every other reviewer will have had exactly the same experience. It can be daunting making these initial choices with a much-recorded work (my next BAL is on one such, and I'm currently listening through 60+ versions of it in order to arrive at my list of 15), but that's what we're expected to do. I hope that helps clarify things somewhat.

[Petrushka]

They trouble me too, above all because they are extremely misleading. As somebody who has done several BALs, I say with absolute clarity that I have never been given any kind of editorial 'steer' in terms of who the 'winners' might be, or what vintage of recordings to choose. For instance, there were no grumbles when I picked Clemens Krauss (1950) for Die Fledermaus a couple of years ago – nor any suggestion that I might prefer a more recent one instead. I think I've explained the process before, but it deserves saying it again: when someone is asked to do a BAL, their first task is to sift through available recordings in order to select up to 15 recordings, a list of which are then sent to the producer. From that, nearer the time of the broadcast, the reviewer (nobody else) is then asked to get that down to a maximum of 10 versions which can be illustrated in the programme. At no point is there any interference, editorial or otherwise, from the BBC – let alone from a record company. The choice is entirely down to the reviewer. That's been my unvarying experience over several years of doing these things, and I'm sure every other reviewer will have had exactly the same experience. It can be daunting making these initial choices with a much-recorded work (my next BAL is on one such, and I'm currently listening through 60+ versions of it in order to arrive at my list of 15), but that's what we're expected to do. I hope that helps clarify things somewhat.

Thank you for your comments.

I'd like to take this opportunity to apologise for setting this particular hare running in my #60 and fully accept that there is no editorial interference from the BBC or by any record company in the choice of those recordings chosen by the reviewers.

Your perspective is extremely useful and I'm grateful for your input to Building a Library and on this Forum.

[oliver sudden]

Thanks Petrushka. Dave Hurwitz was very entertatining & I enjoyed his comments "We need morrrrre strings...".
I haven't listened to BAL yet, like smittims the shifted time just doesn't work, but I'll try to.

Wouldn't it be lovely if Dave Hurwitz could appear on BaL?

I would find a Dave Hurwitz BaL extremely interesting! As long as he could keep the name-calling down a bit.

Curious now about the Nézet-Séguin. The interpretative choices mentioned on this thread seem not so far from Mackerras, although posters seem to prefer the latter—not too many strings, a flowing introduction to the first movement. (I don't think I've ever heard a Brahms symphony (recording or live) and found myself wishing for MORE STRINGS. As far as I'm concerned over-large string sections are the biggest contributor to the common perception of Brahms as a sludgy orchestrator.) I'll have to have a listen, I think.

[oliver sudden]

I enjoyed the BaL, anyway. I shall most certainly be investigating Le Cercle de l'Harmonie on the basis of those few seconds. Not so impressed with the horn call moment in Mackerras's finale heard out of context. A bit blurty and with an unfortunate horn crack in the leadup!

From what they played of COE/YNS it seemed a bit glib but I shall still give it a try.

[richardfinegold]

I enjoyed the BaL, anyway. I shall most certainly be investigating Le Cercle de l'Harmonie on the basis of those few seconds. Not so impressed with the horn call moment in Mackerras's finale heard out of context. A bit blurty and with an unfortunate horn crack in the leadup!

From what they played of COE/YNS it seemed a bit glib but I shall still give it a try.

Fwiw, I read the Gramophone review yesterday and it was a rave.
”Bit slick” is an interesting descriptor. The zippy introduction put me off but then as the movement YNS clawed back a bit of grudging admiration from me. I still think that as a whole it lacks some gravitas that larger force may have provided, particularly in the finale. Szell, among others, shows that having full orchestral firepower combined with energy are not mutually exclusive end points. I listened toBerglund with the COE recently , the same orchestra featured here albeit a quarter century ago, and he managed more of a sense of gravitas with lighter textures.
YNS impresses more in Brahm than in his very forgettable Mendelssohn cycle and it’s probably some prejudice on my part that wants to relegate this to second tier behind all the old favorites. It will be interesting on my part to return to this in a few years.

[Barbirollians]

They trouble me too, above all because they are extremely misleading. As somebody who has done several BALs, I say with absolute clarity that I have never been given any kind of editorial 'steer' in terms of who the 'winners' might be, or what vintage of recordings to choose. For instance, there were no grumbles when I picked Clemens Krauss (1950) for Die Fledermaus a couple of years ago – nor any suggestion that I might prefer a more recent one instead. I think I've explained the process before, but it deserves saying it again: when someone is asked to do a BAL, their first task is to sift through available recordings in order to select up to 15 recordings, a list of which are then sent to the producer. From that, nearer the time of the broadcast, the reviewer (nobody else) is then asked to get that down to a maximum of 10 versions which can be illustrated in the programme. At no point is there any interference, editorial or otherwise, from the BBC – let alone from a record company. The choice is entirely down to the reviewer. That's been my unvarying experience over several years of doing these things, and I'm sure every other reviewer will have had exactly the same experience. It can be daunting making these initial choices with a much-recorded work (my next BAL is on one such, and I'm currently listening through 60+ versions of it in order to arrive at my list of 15), but that's what we're expected to do. I hope that helps clarify things somewhat.

I am glad and reassured to read this . There is, however, in presentation often a push to refer to more modern recordings . There is no obvious explanation as to why Brahms 1 has been a BAL in both 2018 and 2024 - it is the shorttest gap I can remember ever especially as it seems a long time since Brahms 2 or 4 were BALs.

[ucanseetheend]

Ms Hamilton referring to.'so called Chamber Orchestras' and full symphony bands having very little difference. .There is a clear difference in sound and I prefer my Brahms symphonies with a symphony orchestra.Chamber of Europe sound was so lightweight

[oliver sudden]

A brisk introductory tempo is as it happens right up my street since it gives the introduction a chance of relating to the rest of the movement... but I didn't enjoy the slamming-on of the brakes just before the timps go from C to G, and from there on the tempo was quite a bit slower, losing the two in a bar feeling which I think it needs. The size of the string section is also a mixed blessing. I like my Brahms string sound lithe and bitey (YNS gets lots out of the inner voices, which is a definite plus) but I also like a smallish string section because it lets the woodwinds through, which I don't think this recording finally does. (At least in the first movement, which is all I'm going to manage before we have to pick up the kids... the exposition of course has the strings and woodwinds doing antiphonal things and the woodwinds sound like an echo, as usual. I don't think that's intended or effective.) At one point he has the flutes spit out an unwritten top C, which is a quite un-Brahmsian sound to my ear. He also lets the tempo sag too much late in the exposition for my liking. (There's a weird thump at 9:29, whoops. Podium or microphone?) For me the slow coda was a bit of a letdown after the speedy introduction.

Having said that: I liked the energy, the general bite, and the nicely varied articulations, in particular how he has the violins articulate cleanly while sustaining in the bits where they don't have staccatos in the 6/8 Allegro stuff. The whole is more than the sum of the parts and like Richard I'm more impressed by this than by much of what I've heard from YNS live or on disc. I'll definitely be listening to the rest of the symphony.

[Barbirollians]

Only versions mentioned

HVK 1977
Toscanini
Mackerras
YNS
NYPO/Bernstein
BRSO/Colin Davis
Jurowski
Alsop ( but not heard)
Les Cercles de Harmonie - I took a completely opposite view of that screechy violin solo- I am with the Gramophone reviewer Mr Farach-Colton here
JEG ( but not heard)
Chailly - only appeared at the end of the third movement - praised but killed off without explanation.

FINAL three

YNS
Karajan
Mackerras

Rattle , however, makes an appearance at the start of the fourth movement - impressive but too careful according to KH.

So

NO

Abbado
Barbirolli
Boult
Furtwangler
Haitink
Jochum
Kempe
Kertesz
Klemperer
Sanderling
Sawallisch
Szell
Walter
Wand
Weingartner

I find it hard to consider a BAL, that ignores the last winner and so many of the great recordings of the work, very seriously and it reflects poorly on Radio 3 that a producer does not even ensure the last winner is mentioned.

I am a fan of the 1977 Karajan though I think that RFH Testament tops it . I thought the YNS was slick , impressively so , but as much as it annoys me I have to agree with Hurwitz it sounds thin and frankly the performance of the coda KH used to illustrate it as the winner struck me as martial and uptight and not very good a let down .

Mackerras's chamber forces did not sound thin.If a reasonably priced copy is about I shall get it.

[Barbirollians]

Ivan Hewett's scripted BAL is still available as a podcast. My memory is playing tricks on me I thought it was a twofer .

He plays

Rattle
Klemperer
Jurowski
Norrington SWR
Furtwangler
Ticciati
Chailly
Munch
Barenboim Chicago
Mravinsky

Heavens how much more music we seem to hear in these old format BALs than nowadays .


His top three

Furtwangler
Chailly
Norrington

[Barbirollians]

Like Hamilton he chose the coda to illustrate why Fürtwangler was his first choice - listening to the extract it knocks YNS into a cocked hat !

[Retune]

Thanks to makropulos for bringing this thread back to reality. The suggestions of shadowy influences on reviewers were getting a bit silly. If the BBC really did have some hidden agenda to promote new recordings on behalf of Big Gramophone, they could start by restoring Record Review's original slot and runtime so that listeners would have a better chance of hearing them! As it is, I think I saw 16 copies of the winner on Amazon on Saturday, which is now down to 9. If Presto, Europadisc, Ebay and the major download sites have had similar numbers of sales, then DG might have shifted dozens of extra copies of this recording. Yannick Nézet-Séguin won't be able to retire just yet.

I am rather baffled by the short interval between BaLs of some works while others are curiously neglected, though. Even allowing for popularity and numbers of new recordings, some pieces seem to come around more often than the next set of allegations of bad behaviour by a famous conductor, while other major works languish unreviewed for several decades. Who actually decides this? Some anonymous figure on the production team? Don't they have a spreadsheet of previous BaLs?

[Pulcinella]

Thanks to makropulos for bringing this thread back to reality. The suggestions of shadowy influences on reviewers were getting a bit silly. If the BBC really did have some hidden agenda to promote new recordings on behalf of Big Gramophone, they could start by restoring Record Review's original slot and runtime so that listeners would have a better chance of hearing them! As it is, I think I saw 16 copies of the winner on Amazon on Saturday, which is now down to 9. If Presto, Europadisc, Ebay and the major download sites have had similar numbers of sales, then DG might have shifted dozens of extra copies of this recording. Yannick Nézet-Séguin won't be able to retire just yet.

I am rather baffled by the short interval between BaLs of some works while others are curiously neglected, though. Even allowing for popularity and numbers of new recordings, some pieces seem to come around more often than the next set of allegations of bad behaviour by a famous conductor, while other major works languish unreviewed for several decades. Who actually decides this? Some anonymous figure on the production team? Don't they have a spreadsheet of previous BaLs?

If not, but I'm sure they do, they could get some suggestions from our Summer BaLs!

[cloughie]

There was a recording on Nimbus by the LSO conducted by Yondani Butt- would this be a GOAT candidate?