BaL 28.04.18 - Brahms: Symphony no. 1 in C minor

[cloughie]

But what a palaver to have to go through - all many people want to do (ie me) is put the CD in, press play - and we're off!

[gradus]

Excellent BaL very much in the style of I-o-R, with a historically wide range of excerpts and approaches, and a nice, Gramophone-Collection choice of three at the end, revisionist (Norrington) modern classic (Chailly) and Historical (Furtwangler).
Initially much taken with Furtwangler’s 1st Movement, weighty yet vibrant, I was put off by the poor sound for the finale excerpts, even allowing for the webcast’s lossy codec. And having been promised the earth musically, I didn’t find the coda quite as thrilling as Hewitt described.

Very drawn to SWR/Norrington for lovely sound and originality of approach, which still seemed truculently faithfully to Brahms’ struggling conception; but then I adore most of those SWR/Norrington recordings; the Brahms set is one of the few I don’t have.

Ticciati - warm, expressive, flexibility of line, outstandingly vivid, colourful sound… what a shame I can’t stream that one. Pity he didn’t bring Mackerras or Berglund into the discussion at that point, but I think Ticciati would have more than held his own.
I understood (and could hear) his reasons for admiring Chailly, but found it just a shade cool or impersonal.

Disliked the Barenboim and Munch excerpts - variously slow and heavy, or over-intense…
So if I was “in the market” for a Brahms set now, I’d be looking at Norrington and Ticciati.

I agreed with the reviewer's dislike of Ticciati's 2 bar phrasing of the big theme - thought it mannered though apparently sanctioned by the score.

[Karafan]

But we really need an Interpretations on Record - I wd've loved to have heard his take on Norrington LCP - Karajan - Walter - Toscanini - Kertész - Szell - Celibidache - Manze - and so many more.






.

Agreed, Vinteuil!

[HighlandDougie]

Good point! That build up, followed by that sound quality, was almost like a Monty Python sketch. But, as you say, lossy codec, plus (in my case) good headphones plugged straight into a basic computer. Anyone heard Furtwangler in good sound, in Brahms 1, on CD? Furtwangler in good sound can certainly be found in other performances. I really love his Schubert: Symphony No. 9 / Haydn: Symphony No. 88 on DG originals.

The Furtwängler is in the DG BPO Centenary Box (coupled with the Schumann 4th). While the acoustics of the performance venue (Titania Palast) leave something to be desired, the sound isn't really that bad. Universal Japan have released a 2-channel SACD-only version but that is unlikely to have led to a significant improvement in the sound quality as they tend to eschew the Andrew Rose/Pristine 'interventionist' approach to remastering (the WF Brahms First in the Pristine catalogue is the HMV VPO recording).

[Karafan]

I don't know it. But yes, I find I rarely play any of my small selection of Furtwangler discs, and have found my self wondering why, and am beginning to understand why. I also have that 1951 Brahms Sym 1. Must give it a try!

By the way, Richard Osborne, an authority for me on Furtwangler, years ago in Gramophone preferred the Vienna recording of Brahms 1, from earlier in 1952, which Ivan Hewett-like, he thinks incomparable. The review is available on search.

The October '51 Brahms 1st from Hamburg is my all-time-favourite Furtwaengler Brahms recording - in SACD it sounds even more volcanic! https://www.amazon.co.uk/Johannes-Br...rds=B00563YJ4Y

K.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

!

By the way, Richard Osborne, an authority for me on Furtwangler, years ago in Gramophone preferred the Vienna recording of Brahms 1, from earlier in 1952, which Ivan Hewett-like, he thinks incomparable.

With such a miniscule shortlist, this BaL lacked true authority. There wasn't even a HIPP version discussed (and a vibrato-free modern instrument recording doesn't count). I do wonder how many the reviewer actually listened to.

[TG]

I absolutely agree, EA. This struck me as being a very inconsistent, content-lite BAL with little coherence.

I was also utterly astonished to find that Ivan Hewett chose totally to ignore the single biggest point of difference in the work - viz. should the final brass chorale be taken in tempo, or slowed down? All we got was Furtwangler's rendition of it. For me, that one key point is among those that make or break a performance (and I am very much in the 'in tempo because if Brahms had wanted otherwise, he'd have said so' camp).

Similarly, having gone to great pains to say that he found those performances that take a lighter, more transparent approach to the central movements were preferable to those who adopt the massive approach throughout, it seemed totally perverse to make repeated comparisons of Norrington and Chailly on this basis before saying "actually, Furtwangler anyway".

I felt this was poorly thought out and poorly prepared, and I agree thoroughly with your comments regarding the range of performance styles that weren't even considered. Not a mention of Joachim, of Brahms' own recorded remarks on flexibility of tempo, or orchestra size. Unless I missed it, tempo relationships (notably the link between the introduction and first movement proper) went totally by the board too. Surely those should be the basis of any comparative review, since without parameters being set (and the reasons for them discussed), the end result is just the presenter saying 'I liked this, but not that' over and over again.

I know it's a tough job picking one of so many recordings, but this really felt like a lazy trot through the handful of CDs Ivan Hewett happened to have lying around.

[visualnickmos]

I absolutely agree, EA. This struck me as being a very inconsistent, content-lite BAL with little coherence.

I was also utterly astonished to find that Ivan Hewett chose totally to ignore the single biggest point of difference in the work - viz. should the final brass chorale be taken in tempo, or slowed down? All we got was Furtwangler's rendition of it. For me, that one key point is among those that make or break a performance (and I am very much in the 'in tempo because if Brahms had wanted otherwise, he'd have said so' camp).

Similarly, having gone to great pains to say that he found those performances that take a lighter, more transparent approach to the central movements were preferable to those who adopt the massive approach throughout, it seemed totally perverse to make repeated comparisons of Norrington and Chailly on this basis before saying "actually, Furtwangler anyway".

I felt this was poorly thought out and poorly prepared, and I agree thoroughly with your comments regarding the range of performance styles that weren't even considered. Not a mention of Joachim, of Brahms' own recorded remarks on flexibility of tempo, or orchestra size. Unless I missed it, tempo relationships (notably the link between the introduction and first movement proper) went totally by the board too. Surely those should be the basis of any comparative review, since without parameters being set (and the reasons for them discussed), the end result is just the presenter saying 'I liked this, but not that' over and over again.

I know it's a tough job picking one of so many recordings, but this really felt like a lazy trot through the handful of CDs Ivan Hewett happened to have lying around.

Not one of the more memorable Bals, by a long chalk.

[Mal]

But what a palaver to have to go through - all many people want to do (ie me) is put the CD in, press play - and we're off!

That's my preferred mode of operation as well! But you can't usually get BAL on CD (you can get some on CD, I found a stack in a charity shop not far from BBC head office... but I don't think that's a consistent way to get hold of the weekly episodes... but I might be wrong...)

[jayne lee wilson]

With such a miniscule shortlist, this BaL lacked true authority. There wasn't even a HIPP version discussed (and a vibrato-free modern instrument recording doesn't count). I do wonder how many the reviewer actually listened to.

But there are scarcely any HIPPS-Period-Instrument recordings around, apart from Gardiner.... (which for me I'm afraid is one of his least rewarding or memorable sets)...Herreweghe did a wonderful 4th last year (On of my records of the year), but I don't think he's released any more yet (though I saw mention of forthcoming releases somewhere...)

And it absolutely isn't about just being vibrato-free, but employing vibrato selectively as Mackerras does so well, along with the now even rarer portamento, which is used in his SCO set to wonderfully expressive effect (try the andante sostenuto of No.1). But yes, it was disappointing that the reviewer didn't bring the researches into Brahms' performance practice (at Meiningen with Steinbach etc.), which the Telarc notes are so detailed about, into the discussion. A few Chamber-Musical groups have gone further in this respect and very strikingly so - seek out Ironwood in the OP.25/Op.34 works on ABC Classics for a very vivid and extensive application of rubato-vibrato-portamento to their performances (And an excellent accompanying essay about this too). https://www.amazon.co.uk/Tones-Roman...ronwood+Brahms (Or keep well away if you instinctively take against such things... Caveat Emptor - this is very different! Available to stream on Qobuz etc. too.

But given the vast number of recordings I felt that having Furtwangler, Klemperer, Munch etc. on the one hand and Norrington Ticciati and Chailly on the other, he found a decent balance of old and new; and it is always a good thing when the more recent cycles are brought into play, as the qualities of such as Karajan, Walter, Haitink and so on are pretty well-known by now.

A truly comprehensive I-o-R on Brahms 1st, perhaps going back to the startling rubato employed by such as Mengelberg or Furtwangler himself, and comparing that with say, Mackerras (usually a fairly "straight" interpreter, so rather restrained alongside them!) and Ticciati would be vast indeed, and need far longer than a single hour.

[teamsaint]

But there are scarcely any HIPPS-Period-Instrument recordings around, apart from Gardiner.... (which for me I'm afraid is one of his least rewarding or memorable sets)...Herreweghe did a wonderful 4th last year (On of my records of the year), but I don't think he's released any more yet (though I saw mention of forthcoming releases somewhere...)

And it absolutely isn't about just being vibrato-free, but emptying vibrato selectively as Mackerras does so well, along with the now even rarer portamento, which is used in his SCO set to wonderfully expressive effect (try the andante sostenuto of No.1). But yes, it was disappointing that the reviewer didn't bring the researches into Brahms' performance practice (at Meiningen with Steinbach etc.), which the Telarc notes are so detailed about, into the discussion. A few Chamber-Musical groups have gone further in this respect and very strikingly so - seek out Ironwood in the OP.25/Op.34 works on ABC Classics for a very vivid and extensive application of rubato-vibrato-portamento to their performances (And an excellent accompanying essay about this too). https://www.amazon.co.uk/Tones-Roman...ronwood+Brahms (Or keep well away if you instinctively take against such things... Caveat Emptor - this is very different! Available to stream on Qobuz etc. too.

But given the vast number of recordings I felt that having Furtwangler, Klemperer, Munch etc. on the one hand and Norrington Ticciati and Chailly on the other, he found a decent balance of old and new; and it is always a good thing when the more recent cycles are brought play, as the qualities of such as Karajan, Walter, Haitink and so on are pretty well-known by now.

A truly comprehensive I-o-R on Brahms 1st, perhaps going back to the startling rubato employed by such as Mengelberg or Furtwangler himself, and comparing that with say, Mackerras (usually a fairly "straight" interpreter, so rather restrained alongside them!) and Ticciati would be vast indeed, and need far longer than a single hour.

Thanks for the steer on the Ironwood recordings Jayne.
Couldn't resist the Brahms and also their Bach disc.

It's pay day , after all....

[gurnemanz]

I was sure that getting another recording of this work was not an urgent priority for me, but listened thinking I might be due a newish one since all of mine are older - Toscanini x2, Bernstein, Böhm (BPO), Tennstedt (LPO), Boult, Sanderling, Karajan (BPO), none of which, I think, were mentioned. Then an old one went and won it. If I get anything it will be Ticciati.

[Barbirollians]

That VPO Brahms 1 with Furtwangler that RO praised so highly I have on LP - it is a wonderful account and I tend to agree that it shades the 1952 BPO and the 1951 Hamburg but I have no idea if it was ever transferred to CD.

I do recall it being discussed on Record Review at the time I think and that one reviewer said it had struck dumb his class of university music students who had been very dismissive of Beahms before he played it to them.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Brahms-Symphony-No-Haydn-Variations/dp/B000Q6ZUSU

[vinteuil]

By the way, Richard Osborne, an authority for me on Furtwangler, years ago in Gramophone preferred the Vienna recording of Brahms 1, from earlier in 1952, which Ivan Hewett-like, he thinks incomparable. The review is available on search.

.

That VPO Brahms 1 with Furtwangler that RO praised so highly I have on LP - it is a wonderful account and I tend to agree that it shades the 1952 BPO and the 1951 Hamburg but I have no idea if it was ever transferred to CD.

I do recall it being discussed on Record Review at the time I think and that one reviewer said it had struck dumb his class of university music students who had been very dismissive of Beahms before he played it to them.

... is it this one? -

http://amzn.eu/59MK7FK

VPO 27 January 1952.

(ferney's #179 is 17/20 Nov 1947)


.