Disappointments?

[HighlandDougie]

A great selection of views so far, but does anybody else share my misgivings about the Vanska? It really is odd that, for me at least, a recording which has received such critical praise should be so uninvolving.

Having enthused about the Vanska when it appeared, I see no reason to change my mind, after what must be at least a dozen listens. It's horses for course, FF. I don't find the performances in the least uninvolving, hearing detail in them I don't think I've heard before, helped by one of the best recordings I've ever come across. They are measured, yes, but reflective: I like that approach to Sibelius. Having done a quick count of my shelves, I have 15 Sibelius cycles on CD plus a good number of other recordings of the symphonies. The 6th - a very special work which I've never felt gets quite the right performance on record - is the performance I've been waiting for. You are, though, not a lone voice. The soi-disant expert on all music, David Hurwitz, is sniffy about them, too.

[jayne lee wilson]

I totally agree about the Beecham Lemminkainen's return, but what about his Tapiola? Never bettered in my view. I certainly return frequently to Alexander Gibson, especially his Chandos recording of the Four Legends.

A great selection of views so far, but does anybody else share my misgivings about the Vanska? It really is odd that, for me at least, a recording which has received such critical praise should be so uninvolving.

As I said elsewhere recently:

"If you want a reference-class modern recording, look no further than the new Minnesota/Vanska Sibelius 3/6/7 on BIS. Just been listening to the 24/96 download (WAVs, playback: JRiver), and it's the epitome of 3D spaciousness and precision, effortless power and transparency. The 7th can often seem texturally or contrapuntally dense, but there's not a trace of that here, and the 6th has an almost Mozartian levity and elegance, but with a guttier attack in the finale. Extraordinary string sound. Miraculous, left me dizzy with pleasure....

..... the way Vanska increases tension and excitement in the 6th's finale, but without any loss of articulation or control, is remarkable. It's about a minute slower than his Lahti recording in this movement, but the difference is one of sheer poised weight and beauty of tone, not just the evident gains in clarity - the musical meaning is enriched in a movement which can often seem to gabble repetitively. Just comparing the two at the start of the finale now, the expressive gains, in range and subtlety, over that much-praised earlier 6th are obvious straight away; and the dynamic subtlety (quicksilver, sudden shifts in level) adds a great deal too. It's as if Vanska has rethought every phrase and paragraph.

The new 7th takes clarity of argument, (e.g. the contrast in the scherzo sections), to a new level for me, and those trombones have wonderful weight and texture. The 7th seems one of those pieces best not "interpreted" too much and the intensity here seems to grow essentially from that transparency and firmness of phrase, sureness of tempi choices."

It can sometimes be difficult with such an uncompromising approach as the BIS - spacious mid hall, wide dynamic range - to find an enjoyable playback level in any given system/room (often unmentioned, the latter is very influential in what you hear)... but I found this relatively easily in 6 and 7. With the 3rd, the more massive climaxes and slightly richer orchestration took a little more patience...!
Some adjustability in a hifi system (which tended to fall out of fashion with minimalist amplifier designs) can be very useful...I find computer replay settings and Dac filter choices can often save your listening-pleasure-day.

[Richard Barrett]

The soi-disant expert on all music, David Hurwitz, is sniffy about them, too.

That's enough of a recommendation for me, I'll be ordering them right away!

No but seriously, Sibelius generally does very little for me, but what I've heard about these recordings makes me think they might change my mind.

[pastoralguy]

I honestly don't think I've ever heard any performance of a work by Sibelius that has disappointed me!

[Tony Halstead]

I honestly don't think I've ever heard any performance of a work by Sibelius that has disappointed me!

Jimmy Loughran used to do SUPERB Sibelius 1,2, and 5 as I recall with the BBCSSO when I was there 1966-1970.
Maybe the most compelling and Sibelius-stylish no 6 I've ever played was with STANFORD ROBINSON ( now there's an unjustly neglected conductor) and the BBCSSO.
Maybe my 'rose-tinted' spectacles are too 'rosy' by the distance of the years... BUT I do think that the late, great Sir Alex Gibson was a great Sibelian. I will never ever forget a 'gob-smacking ' #3 that he did with the LSO in the early 1970s, maybe in the RFH and also in the wonderful ( acoustically) Croydon Fairfield Hall.

[pastoralguy]

Jimmy Loughran used to do SUPERB Sibelius 1,2, and 5 as I recall with the BBCSSO when I was there 1966-1970.
Maybe the most compelling and Sibelius-stylish no 6 I've ever played was with STANFORD ROBINSON ( now there's an unjustly neglected conductor) and the BBCSSO.
Maybe my 'rose-tinted' spectacles are too 'rosy' by the distance of the years... BUT I do think that the late, great Sir Alex Gibson was a great Sibelian. I will never ever forget a 'gob-smacking ' #3 that he did with the LSO in the early 1970s, maybe in the RFH and also in the wonderful ( acoustically) Croydon Fairfield Hall.

I heard a lot of Sibelius from the baton of Sir Alex Gibson from 1977 through to his retirement from the SNO. If I'm really honest, I suspect he was past his peak by this time but, to my naive ears, his Sibelius always sounded like the 'real thing'. I always thought the SNO was a very fine instrument for Sibelius which doesn't really require big, sumptuous orchestral sounds. Their lean sound (of that period), was well suited to the Finnish master.

[Ferretfancy]

As I said elsewhere recently:

"If you want a reference-class modern recording, look no further than the new Minnesota/Vanska Sibelius 3/6/7 on BIS. Just been listening to the 24/96 download (WAVs, playback: JRiver), and it's the epitome of 3D spaciousness and precision, effortless power and transparency. The 7th can often seem texturally or contrapuntally dense, but there's not a trace of that here, and the 6th has an almost Mozartian levity and elegance, but with a guttier attack in the finale. Extraordinary string sound. Miraculous, left me dizzy with pleasure....

..... the way Vanska increases tension and excitement in the 6th's finale, but without any loss of articulation or control, is remarkable. It's about a minute slower than his Lahti recording in this movement, but the difference is one of sheer poised weight and beauty of tone, not just the evident gains in clarity - the musical meaning is enriched in a movement which can often seem to gabble repetitively. Just comparing the two at the start of the finale now, the expressive gains, in range and subtlety, over that much-praised earlier 6th are obvious straight away; and the dynamic subtlety (quicksilver, sudden shifts in level) adds a great deal too. It's as if Vanska has rethought every phrase and paragraph.

The new 7th takes clarity of argument, (e.g. the contrast in the scherzo sections), to a new level for me, and those trombones have wonderful weight and texture. The 7th seems one of those pieces best not "interpreted" too much and the intensity here seems to grow essentially from that transparency and firmness of phrase, sureness of tempi choices."

It can sometimes be difficult with such an uncompromising approach as the BIS - spacious mid hall, wide dynamic range - to find an enjoyable playback level in any given system/room (often unmentioned, the latter is very influential in what you hear)... but I found this relatively easily in 6 and 7. With the 3rd, the more massive climaxes and slightly richer orchestration took a little more patience...!
Some adjustability in a hifi system (which tended to fall out of fashion with minimalist amplifier designs) can be very useful...I find computer replay settings and Dac filter choices can often save your listening-pleasure-day.

Well Jayne, we must agree to disagree. One question though, do you listen to the SACD surround? I can only play the stereo configuration on my system and I never think that it sounds as good as a stereo only disc, although this is absolutely subjective on my part. Maybe the SACD surround is markedly superior. I still think that the performances never really take fire, and I have numerous other versions for comparison.

[Beef Oven!]

Regarding the ‘Scandinavian credentials’ and all that ‘ice-cool northern European Scandinavian’ stuff, I take it with a pinch of salt. The cycles I've enjoyed most over the last 12 months were Bernstein, Ashkenazy (esp. his recent concerts), Maazel and Abravanel - four nice Jewish boys.

[jayne lee wilson]

Well Jayne, we must agree to disagree. One question though, do you listen to the SACD surround? I can only play the stereo configuration on my system and I never think that it sounds as good as a stereo only disc, although this is absolutely subjective on my part. Maybe the SACD surround is markedly superior. I still think that the performances never really take fire, and I have numerous other versions for comparison.

No, the Minnesota Sibelius I've been listening to is not the SACD nor any disc, it is the 24/96 stereo WAVE files (converted from the purchased eClassical FLACs) played out from a Mac Pro running JRiverMC19, via filtered & regenerated USB to the Dac.

I've occasionally had my doubts about hybrid discs, but usually put it down to variations in the recording quality itself. In fact the last SACD-hybrid I bought, the Storioni Trio and the Georgian CO in Martinu Trio-Concertos (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Concertino-...words=storioni), is one of the most stunning recent stereo CDs I've heard (vibrant & texturally immediate, very present but dynamic too), if also very system-demanding...!
I would also offer 2/1872 & 3/1873 from the Simone Young Bruckner series as good-sounding examples.

[richardfinegold]

Best Sibelius 5 I ever heard was Bernstein and the LSO and echoing the praise for Beecham, his version of Lemminkainens Return with the LPO, the RFH live Sibelius 2 is terrific too imv.
In practice however I rarely hear performances of Sibelius that I dislike.perhaps he only gets conducted by people who are good at the music? I'm happy to accept that Berglund is great in this repertoire but how about Kajanus and Hannikainen who were torch bearers for Sibelius for some years before Berglund and recorded many performances or Koussevitsky for that matter.

I just bought the Sony Sibelius Bernstein box. Afraid that I have to disagree, Gradus; I didn't like any of it except the VC. Sibelius isn't Mahler but someone forgot to tell Lenny

[richardfinegold]

As I said elsewhere recently:

"If you want a reference-class modern recording, look no further than the new Minnesota/Vanska Sibelius 3/6/7 on BIS. Just been listening to the 24/96 download (WAVs, playback: JRiver), and it's the epitome of 3D spaciousness and precision, effortless power and transparency. The 7th can often seem texturally or contrapuntally dense, but there's not a trace of that here, and the 6th has an almost Mozartian levity and elegance, but with a guttier attack in the finale. Extraordinary string sound. Miraculous, left me dizzy with pleasure....

..... the way Vanska increases tension and excitement in the 6th's finale, but without any loss of articulation or control, is remarkable. It's about a minute slower than his Lahti recording in this movement, but the difference is one of sheer poised weight and beauty of tone, not just the evident gains in clarity - the musical meaning is enriched in a movement which can often seem to gabble repetitively. Just comparing the two at the start of the finale now, the expressive gains, in range and subtlety, over that much-praised earlier 6th are obvious straight away; and the dynamic subtlety (quicksilver, sudden shifts in level) adds a great deal too. It's as if Vanska has rethought every phrase and paragraph.

The new 7th takes clarity of argument, (e.g. the contrast in the scherzo sections), to a new level for me, and those trombones have wonderful weight and texture. The 7th seems one of those pieces best not "interpreted" too much and the intensity here seems to grow essentially from that transparency and firmness of phrase, sureness of tempi choices."

It can sometimes be difficult with such an uncompromising approach as the BIS - spacious mid hall, wide dynamic range - to find an enjoyable playback level in any given system/room (often unmentioned, the latter is very influential in what you hear)... but I found this relatively easily in 6 and 7. With the 3rd, the more massive climaxes and slightly richer orchestration took a little more patience...!
Some adjustability in a hifi system (which tended to fall out of fashion with minimalist amplifier designs) can be very useful...I find computer replay settings and Dac filter choices can often save your listening-pleasure-day.

I have only been able to listen to these on my laptop through headphones because I can't make the download work with multichannel system (haven't been able work on it due my Medical Issues). My setup is MacBook Pro PC, Audioquest Dragonfly DAC, and OppoPlanar Magnet 3 phones. I pretty much agree with JLW assessment.
Btw, had my surgery today. I had read the Op in the waiting room and then was called in. Upon awakening in recovery room, had the opening measures of the 6th running through my head!
I ordered the SACD, which isn't released here until Sep 9. Will share more thoughts then.
And ferret, don't be put out if you find yourself a minority opinion here. No one intends to pile on. Thanks for starting a great thread!

[Hornspieler]

And which of Berglund's three complete recorded surveys of the symphonies (plus several other recordings of individual or pairings of symphonies) were the 'true' definitive ones? Presumably his late insights with the C.O.E, rather than those with some provincial South Coast band or other.

Collins English Dictionary defines the word "Benchmark" as follows:

... a criterion by which to measure something; a standard or reference point.

It does not mean that the standard set cannot be surpassed - it simply means that the aim should be to reach that standard or to exceed it.

I was a member of that provincial South Coast band which, under Paavo Berglund produced the first-ever recording (and public performance in the RFH) of Sibelius's "Kullervo" symphony; a reading which was awarded EMI's "Record of the Year".

I don't know whether Tony ever played under Berglund's eccentric left-handed baton, but in singling out Sir Alexander Gibson's Sibelius recordings he seems to confirm what I suggested about my preference for Sir Alexander Gibson's readings of Sibelius among the British conductors. (and yes, I did play Sibelius under Sir Thomas Beecham with the RPO way back in 1956)

HS

[Richard Barrett]

Collins English Dictionary defines the word "Benchmark" as follows:

... a criterion by which to measure something; a standard or reference point.

It does not mean that the standard set cannot be surpassed - it simply means that the aim should be to reach that standard or to exceed it.

This is clear, but the word you used was "definitive", which that same dictionary defines as "serving to decide or settle finally; conclusive".

[Hornspieler]

This is clear, but the word you used was "definitive", which that same dictionary defines as "serving to decide or settle finally; conclusive".

Thank you for the English lesson.

Perhaps we should return to the subject of Sibelius and stop bickering about semantics?

HS

[Barbirollians]

I like Gibson's Sibelius but Barbirolli is a cut above even if the 3rd is too slow . His EMI set was a revelation and his RPO Second and NYPO First are two of the greatest Sibelius records ever made IMO .