BaL 13.05.23 - Sibelius: Symphony no 6

[Barbirollians]

I thought it was OK - but the field was absurdly small - the HVK EMI recording, Ashkenazy and most of all Beecham ( whose recording RL said Sibelius's daughter said was her father's favourite of all recordings of his works ) ignored.

[visualnickmos]

I thought it was OK - but the field was absurdly small - the HVK EMI recording, Ashkenazy and most of all Beecham ( whose recording RL said Sibelius's daughter said was her father's favourite of all recordings of his works ) ignored.

Agreed. A work with a tremendous recorded provenance, so much of which was not even mentioned, let alone sampled. Not good.

[Barbirollians]

And one other bugbear - Naxos CDs are now £10 or so Mr McGregor - no longer bargain but mid price .

[Barbirollians]

Probably, not his best Sibelius recorded only a week before he died but I remain fond of it - Barbirolli also not mentioned

[Nick Armstrong]

Listening - very belatedly - to this BaL in my bland hotel room in Hong Kong has cheered me up greatly. One of my favourite pieces of music - and my favourite recording as winner. Stellar recording quality and the performances with which it's coupled are also pretty impressive. I thought that Mark Lowther's comments on Makela were spot on - very good but still something of a work in progress. And on Berglund being a bit "dogged" in a mercurial symphony which is anything but that (I think that I was at the concert in the RFH which formed the basis of the LPO Live recording). A good BaL, I thought.

Agreed. I only listened belatedly too.

ML explained very well the issue of apparent tempo changes being due to Sibelius’s deft use of different note lengths, not actual changes in the measure / pulse itself

Another comment which rang true with my experiences was in ML’s introduction when he said that in complete cycles, conductors tend to shine in some but not often all the symphonies due to the latter all being so different from one another.

For example, I’ve always found Colin Davis ‘gets’ No. 3 like no one else, but never quite convinces me in No. 5. It’s the opposite with Vanska.

No arguments with the conclusion: old Osmo certainly does get No. 6

[Barbirollians]

Agreed. I only listened belatedly too.

ML explained very well the issue of apparent tempo changes being due to Sibelius’s deft use of different note lengths, not actual changes in the measure / pulse itself

Another comment which rang true with my experiences was in ML’s introduction when he said that in complete cycles, conductors tend to shine in some but not often all the symphonies due to the latter all being so different from one another.

For example, I’ve always found Colin Davis ‘gets’ No. 3 like no one else, but never quite convinces me in No. 5. It’s the opposite with Vanska.

No arguments with the conclusion: old Osmo certainly does get No. 6

Barbirolli very much the opposite of dogged - criticised I think for being too blithe . Looking at Gramophone today I was struck how much more I agreed with Robert Layton's positive approach to most of the Halle/Barbirolli Sibelius recordings compared to Andrew Achenbach's later carpings.

[Nick Armstrong]

Barbirolli very much the opposite of dogged - criticised I think for being too blithe . Looking at Gramophone today I was struck how much more I agreed with Robert Layton's positive approach to most of the Halle/Barbirolli Sibelius recordings compared to Andrew Achenbach's later carpings.

I think that may be a reply to HD and his reference to the Berglund “dogged” approach?

[Barbirollians]

Yes sorry wrong post quoted.

[Maclintick]

Another comment which rang true with my experiences was in ML’s introduction when he said that in complete cycles, conductors tend to shine in some but not often all the symphonies due to the latter all being so different from one another.

Agreed. This seems to be more the case with Sibelius than many another composer, possibly arising from the fashion for “completeism” which afflicts conductors and/or their recording companies to varying degrees. These pieces are so different that no one stick-waver can be expected to have a close affinity with all of them. Personally, I find the Minnesota/Vänskä version of the 6th a bit plodding overall, especially in the first movt & with undercharacterised woodwind, compared to, say, RPO/ Beecham or BPO/HvK. By contrast, the Minnesota 7th is one of the finest I’ve heard - beautifully paced, & with sonorous grandeur in climaxes. Ace SQ, as well, as others have commented.

[smittims]

Your post, Maclintick, suggests to me a reason for something that has puzzled me: why some leading Sibelius interpreters (Koussevitzky, Beecham, Karajan) played some of the symphonies and not all of them. In the same way Sviatoslav Richter resisted many invitations to peform or record the complete this or that, preferring always to make his own selections.

It's worth remembering that the first conductor to record all nine Beethoven symphonies, Felix Weingartner, had to be persuaded to complete the set . I think he preferred only four or five of them . Similarly with Brendel and the Mozart sonatas , etc.

[Petrushka]

Similarlly, I don’t believe Bruno Walter recorded all the Mahler Symphonies (happy to be proved wrong, if forumites know otherwise).
Odd, especially in the case of no 3, which the composer played for Walter on the piano in his hut at Steinbach shortly after finishing composing it.

Walter performed the Mahler 3 with the VPO at the Salzburg Festival on August 19 1936 but he never recorded it. He didn't record the 6th, 7th or 8th nor can I find mention of any performance.

[Maclintick]

Walter performed the Mahler 3 with the VPO at the Salzburg Festival on August 19 1936 but he never recorded it. He didn't record the 6th, 7th or 8th nor can I find mention of any performance.

Thanks, Petrushka. I knew I could rely on the expertise of forumites.

[pastoralguy]

Your post, Maclintick, suggests to me a reason for something that has puzzled me: why some leading Sibelius interpreters (Koussevitzky, Beecham, Karajan) played some of the symphonies and not all of them. In the same way Sviatoslav Richter resisted many invitations to peform or record the complete this or that, preferring always to make his own selections.

It's worth remembering that the first conductor to record all nine Beethoven symphonies, Felix Weingartner, had to be persuaded to complete the set . I think he preferred only four or five of them . Similarly with Brendel and the Mozart sonatas , etc.

I’ve spent quite a lot of time, (probably TOO much time!) reading old editions of Gramophone online and from reading both reviews and correspondence it seemed that there was a feeling that repertoire shouldn’t be over recorded so if conductor A had recorded, say, Sibelius 1 then there was little point in conductor B recording Sibelius 1 when there was no recording of say Sibelius 4. There are many letters saying why do we need THREE recordings of the ‘New World’ symphony when the Seventh has no recordings at all.

And since a recording of a single symphony cost cost half a weeks wages there seems little point in spreading the market. (The new cycle of Sibelius symphonies by Klaus Mäkelä would take me an hour’s work to pay for!)

I suppose that’s where a programme such as Record Review was created so enthusiasts could hear what was on offer and purchase one recording of a piece. Nowadays, it’s less valuable since recordings are so incredibly inexpensive. (I recently had a thing for Schubert’s String Quintet and I was able to buy certain CDs for less than a pound).

Complete cycles by one artist seems to have developed as a desire of the record companies and it takes a very strong willed artist to resist their power. I believe Ashkenazy had little sympathy for Tchaikovsky’s First Piano Concerto but was persuaded to record it anyway since DECCA knew it would sell well. Apparently, Karajan refused to record Sibelius 3 since it was a work he thought wasn’t deserving of his time! ( Sir Simon told me that when he came to record his Sibelius cycle with the Berliner Philharmoniker they didn’t have a set of parts in the orchestra’s library and there was no record of the orchestra ever having played it!)

[Petrushka]

I’ve spent quite a lot of time, (probably TOO much time!) reading old editions of Gramophone online and from reading both reviews and correspondence it seemed that there was a feeling that repertoire shouldn’t be over recorded so if conductor A had recorded, say, Sibelius 1 then there was little point in conductor B recording Sibelius 1 when there was no recording of say Sibelius 4. There are many letters saying why do we need THREE recordings of the ‘New World’ symphony when the Seventh has no recordings at all.

And since a recording of a single symphony cost cost half a weeks wages there seems little point in spreading the market. (The new cycle of Sibelius symphonies by Klaus Mäkelä would take me an hour’s work to pay for!)

I suppose that’s where a programme such as Record Review was created so enthusiasts could hear what was on offer and purchase one recording of a piece. Nowadays, it’s less valuable since recordings are so incredibly inexpensive. (I recently had a thing for Schubert’s String Quintet and I was able to buy certain CDs for less than a pound).

Complete cycles by one artist seems to have developed as a desire of the record companies and it takes a very strong willed artist to resist their power. I believe Ashkenazy had little sympathy for Tchaikovsky’s First Piano Concerto but was persuaded to record it anyway since DECCA knew it would sell well. Apparently, Karajan refused to record Sibelius 3 since it was a work he thought wasn’t deserving of his time! ( Sir Simon told me that when he came to record his Sibelius cycle with the Berliner Philharmoniker they didn’t have a set of parts in the orchestra’s library and there was no record of the orchestra ever having played it!)

Another thing was that the record companies didn't want overlapping recordings so, for instance, EMI wouldn't have done a complete RVW cycle from Barbirolli when they already had one from Boult. Elgar was more 'popular' so they could get away with that.

In his biography of Karajan, Richard Osborne says that plans had been made for Karajan to record the Sibelius 3 in 1990 but the Grim Reaper intervened.

[pastoralguy]

Another thing was that the record companies didn't want overlapping recordings so, for instance, EMI wouldn't have done a complete RVW cycle from Barbirolli when they already had one from Boult. Elgar was more 'popular' so they could get away with that.

In his biography of Karajan, Richard Osborne says that plans had been made for Karajan to record the Sibelius 3 in 1990 but the Grim Reaper intervened.

I believe Karajan was interested in recording DSCH’s 8th symphony. Now THAT would have been something!