BaL 5.10.24 - Brahms: Symphony 1

[Pulcinella]

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

How about one by Bertrand de Billy?

I've streamed all four YNS and they've not displaced those on my shelves in my affection.

[pastoralguy]

How about one by Bertrand de Billy?

I've streamed all four YNS and they've not displaced those on my shelves in my affection.

Apparently, when Karajan und Die Berliner Philharmoniker performed a Brahms symphony cycle, he would leave the First Symphony until the end. I use this approach with any new new Brahms symphony cycle and thank goodness I did when listening to YN-S’s new recording. The beginning of the symphony is quite… perky!

[silvestrione]

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?

Yes, I am too. Beethoven 4 was not done at all until Rob Cowan did it a few years back, now it's on again, but in my memory the Eroica has only been done once in my about 50 year listening to BAL. Beethoven's wonderful D Major Piano Sonata op 10, NOT AT ALL. Schubert's wonderful late G Major Piano Sonata, NOT AT ALL. We could all go on, of course...

[Barbirollians]

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?

I suspect they might look at our Summer BALs - when there was a discussion of how long it had been since Beethoven 4 had been done - a couple of months later up popped Joanna McGregor on the very piece . Conincidence possibly - I do still think this remarkably short gap between Brahms 1 BAL's is somewhat odd.

[Barbirollians]

Yes, I am too. Beethoven 4 was not done at all until Rob Cowan did it a few years back, now it's on again, but in my memory the Eroica has only been done once in my about 50 year listening to BAL. Beethoven's wonderful D Major Piano Sonata op 10, NOT AT ALL. Schubert's wonderful late G Major Piano Sonata, NOT AT ALL. We could all go on, of course...

I think Rob did the Emperor after a very long gap.

[Wolfram]

In general I enjoyed this BaL. My only quibble is that I would have liked a brief explanation as to why Karajan’s 1977 recording was chosen over his others - I was very interested to know.

I streamed the winner and thought it worth acquiring as an excellent chamber orchestra version. I’m not so sure if the other symphonies in the set are as good though. I had a listen to the first movement of number 4 - my favourite by a long way - and wasn’t so impressed; that one really did need more strings!

Sorry, just one more quibble: can you do a BaL on a Brahms symphony and ignore Bruno Walter?

[smittims]

Well, you can , but you shouldn't , in my opinion.

[Goon525]

I’m very glad Makropulos has intervened on this thread dispelling at least some of the conspiracy theories. Apparently it’s a disgrace to some that Katy H mentioned Toscanini rather than Furtwangler. I’ve seen her in another environment and think very highly of her abilities both as speaker and analyst, and at least one contributor above is guilty of misogyny in my view. I don’t think it’s a crime to pick a recent version, and personally would prefer that a library choice is at least from the stereo era. A library choice is not necessarily the best performance of all time, but one that balances artistic and technical issues consummately.

[oliver sudden]

I've heard the rest of COE/YNS and am puzzled.

It's SO STRINGY. Which is great up to a point: YNS has lots of ideas for articulation, isn't afraid of the odd bit of portamento, and really makes something out of the inner voices. But I feel as though that's where all his attention has gone (and not just his but that of the engineers!). Often the wind melodies practically disappear behind the string countersubjects, and when the boot is on the other foot, countermelodies in the winds practically vanish. The solo violin at the end of the Andante dominates the solo horn so effortlessly it's not funny.

In fact I often have the impression in other parameters as well that he would rather be doing something rather more old-fashionedly symphonic. Some of the tempo modifications are very much in that direction: the end of the third movement practically stops. On the other hand he doesn't slow down significantly for the chorale near the end of the fourth movement, which definitely suits my preference, and the coda worked better for me in context than in the tiny excerpt from the BaL, although the accelerando to the said coda was a rather bumpy ride.

Not really for me, in other words. I'm all for a small string section but I don't want them balanced so they're louder than the winds (I don't care whether it was YNS or DG pulling off that bit of trickery). I'm also all for a de-cobwebbed approach to tempi but I don't really go for having some corners of the piece spick and span while others are left cobwebbed and dusty.

The thing about Walter, Furtwängler and co though... I think it's perfectly understandable that a presenter who has studied her Brahms very seriously indeed should make her BaL choice from among the recordings that present the piece as she understands it. I love the Furtwängler but I'm happy to admit that in many respects it's not really Brahms. I love various aspects of the Walter but it doesn't have the momentum I want from the piece. I suppose it would have been good if she'd name-checked it, but there are so many recordings out there (she said three hundred and something but I'm not sure if that was reality or a rhetorically random largeish number) that even just ticking off the list would have taken up too much of the running time if she'd gone into any depth at all about her reasoning. I grew up with a fairly symphonic understanding of this music but it didn't take long for the historical performance side of things to convince me that looking more closely at what Brahms was more likely imagining as he wrote it can at least potentially get us closer to what the piece is 'about'. And KH is a decade and a bit younger than me, so probably didn't even initially get to know the pieces through Karajan et al. I'm all for her calling it as she hears it, even though I don't hear it quite the same way. It's just a radio programme after all.

[richardfinegold]

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?

Another argument against the notion that record companies might be exerting any influence here is that for every new record they release, the majors must be releasing three from yesteryear. Presumably they make more on the older material with respect to royalties, etc.
I suspect that a working musician such as KH would be inclined to be more sympathetic to living colleagues than to those several generations removed, for many reasons

[Barbirollians]

I’m very glad Makropulos has intervened on this thread dispelling at least some of the conspiracy theories. Apparently it’s a disgrace to some that Katy H mentioned Toscanini rather than Furtwangler. I’ve seen her in another environment and think very highly of her abilities both as speaker and analyst, and at least one contributor above is guilty of misogyny in my view. I don’t think it’s a crime to pick a recent version, and personally would prefer that a library choice is at least from the stereo era. A library choice is not necessarily the best performance of all time, but one that balances artistic and technical issues consummately.

I am very glad you think so highly of her . The point , which has been made on here before , including as I recall by ferneyhoughgeliebte before he went fishing was that if BAL wishes to be a serious review programme on which individuals are to rely to buy recordings then it is disrespectful to the past buyer for a new BAL especially one so hot on the heels of the last Bol not to explain why the previous winner was not even being considered . I think that's a fair point but one the producer should surely get the reviewer to cover.

[Wolfram]

I am very glad you think so highly of her . The point , which has been made on here before , including as I recall by ferneyhoughgeliebte before he went fishing was that if BAL wishes to be a serious review programme on which individuals are to rely to buy recordings then it is disrespectful to the past buyer for a new BAL especially one so hot on the heels of the last Bol not to explain why the previous winner was not even being considered . I think that's a fair point but one the producer should surely get the reviewer to cover.

Just from memory, I think it is relatively rare for a BaL reviewer to identify a previous winner, and when a previous winner is played it is rarely referenced as such. It’s like each new review is a fresh start, beginning with a clean sheet. I like the idea of this in principle; why should a reviewer be burdened with the choices of the past, they should each have the editorial freedom to tell the story as they hear it. And we are free to agree or disagree as we hear it.

[Barbirollians]

Just from memory, I think it is relatively rare for a BaL reviewer to identify a previous winner, and when a previous winner is played it is rarely referenced as such. It’s like each new review is a fresh start, beginning with a clean sheet. I like the idea of this in principle; why should a reviewer be burdened with the choices of the past, they should each have the editorial freedom to tell the story as they hear it. And we are free to agree or disagree as we hear it.

They may not refer directly to it but it is very rare that a previous winner is not mentioned at all in discussion unless it has been deleted and is entirely unavailable.

[Goon525]

They may not refer directly to it but it is very rare that a previous winner is not mentioned at all in discussion unless it has been deleted and is entirely unavailable.

That is a fair point.