Karajan's Sibelius (#4 specifically)
Ward Hardman
not Herbert von Karajan's Sibelius was idiomatic, considering its refinement.
Mr. Stenroos was able to marshal several quotes from the composer himself
in praise of HvK's recordings, presumably his early mono EMI efforts with
the Philharmonia Orchestra.
Last night I did some comparative listening to HvK's DGG "Originals"
recording of Sibelius' 4th symphony, plus Gibson's SNO version on Chandos
and Vanska's Bis version. I still find Gibson to be on target as to what
I consider the essence of this work, while Karajan seemed too slow in
places. Here are comparative timings for CD versions of the 4th I was
able to locate in my library:
Date I II III IV
Gibson (1983) 8:00 4:51 7:39 9:15
Collins (1954) 8:47 3:59 8:48 10:06
Stokowski (1932) 8:16 4:26 8:27 10:50
Ashkenazy (1981) 9:38 4:32 9:23 9:13
Karajan (1965) 10:01 4:46 12:00 9:21
Vanska (1997) 11:36 4:29 14:04 9:04
Vanska's I is 45% slower than Gibson's, HvK's is 25% slower.
Vanska's III is 85% " " " " " 57% " !
I feel that Karajan drags too much in I and III... were his early
EMI/Philharmonia timings sufficiently different to redeem him and
account for Sibelius' praise? (Vanska is really out of it here.
Luckily I had set an alarm clock which woke me at the end of his
soporific trudge.)
I once acquired most of Colin Davis' Boston/Phillips LP versions,
but took back the disk with the 4th on it. Davis had a similar
schizophrenic approach to the odd- and even-numbered movements,
dragging out I and III.
HvK also uses only glockenspiel in IV, which I consider rather puny.
(I think Stoky uses chimes in some spots requiring more carrying power,
but didn't get to hear him in the time available.)
If anybody can add HvK's early and late EMI timings, plus those of
Davis, Bernstein, Ormandy, etc., it would be appreciated. (I'd
especially like some data on Rodzinski's version!) Your opinions,
too, are welcome.
Perhaps the HvK performances Sibelius liked were different from those
most of us are familiar with. ;-)
--Ward Hardman
"The older I get, the more I admire and crave competence, just simple
competence, in any field from adultery to zoology."
- H.L. Mencken
David Wake
I can help you with a couple of those:
HvK/BPO/1976/EMI 10'38" 5'27" 12'49" 9'49" (better than DG, IMO)
Bernstein/NYP/1966/Sony 11'09" 5'19" 11'14" 11'32"
My two favorites:
Beecham/LPO/1937/EMI 9'58" 4'06" 9'35" 8'35"
Maazel/VPO/1968/Decca 10'17" 4'06" 9'07" 9'13"
I seem to have mislaid the HvK/Philh.
David
Curtis Croulet
5, 6 & 7 (that's all they had at Borders in Carmel Mtn Ranch, San Diego). I
just got home and I haven't listened to any of them yet. The listed timings
for the Fourth are: I 9:50, II 5:02, III 12:09, IV 9.23.
--
Curtis Croulet
Temecula, California
+33° 27' 59", -117° 05' 53"
Curtis Croulet
collection, so I cannot compare the Philharmonia recordings with the later
ones. Oh, I just remembered, I think there's a Finlandia on an LP sampler
somewhere.
Barney O'Hara
his later EMI with BPO has a slow movement to the 4th that renders me
emotionally moved beyond words.
Simply, the best I've ever heard.
"Ward Hardman" <har...@sciences.sdsu.edu> wrote in message
news:a8frqm$2p3$1...@gondor.sdsu.edu...
Lawrence Chalmers
I think that they were somehow "austere" and
introverted - particularly the 4th. But my favorite is Davis/BSO and
next, Barbirolli.
Just my two cents, as usual.
Stephen North
> Date I II III IV
>
> Gibson (1983) 8:00 4:51 7:39 9:15
> Collins (1954) 8:47 3:59 8:48 10:06
> Stokowski (1932) 8:16 4:26 8:27 10:50
> Ashkenazy (1981) 9:38 4:32 9:23 9:13
> Karajan (1965) 10:01 4:46 12:00 9:21
> Vanska (1997) 11:36 4:29 14:04 9:04
>
> most of us are familiar with. ;-)
>
> --Ward Hardman
>
Ward
This is fascinating, though I fear inconclusive. I know plenty of
conductors who are slow but compelling and plenty of fast ones who
miss the point.
I'm very surprised at your dismissal of Vanska: I have no axe to grind
for the performance but here is a conductor who knows more about
Sibelius' music than most of us know about putting on our trousers. He
has conducted more of Sibelius' music than any of the conductors you
list, he understand the genisis of these works better than most and he
is a fine conductor (so the problem is not that he was trying to get a
different effect from his orchestra).Are you seriously suggesting that
- no matter how uncomfortable - his thoughts on Sibelius 4, they are
to be ignored?
The more interesting questions for me are - why is Vanska so slow and
what does it tells me about the music ?
SN
Ray Hall
news:s1Lq8.9$DUB3....@news2.randori.com...
| Because of that thread, I've bought Karajan's Philharmonia recordings of
4,
| 5, 6 & 7 (that's all they had at Borders in Carmel Mtn Ranch, San Diego).
I
| just got home and I haven't listened to any of them yet. The listed
timings
| for the Fourth are: I 9:50, II 5:02, III 12:09, IV 9.23.
Plea`th rea`d th F%OR a`n S (which la`uncheth a`ll k=indth of5 weird thingth
on PC) due to pure thpring wa`ter being thpilled over k=eyboa`rd. Bugger it.
nd I a`m not j6ok=ing.
Ma`a`zel'th.VPO timing f5or IV = 10.12 - 4.02 - 9.03 - 9.14 ith a`n
exthellent rea`ding a`nd with a` very a`uthtere 1tht movement - rea`l icy.
Berglund/Bournemouth'th timing f5or IV = 10.45 - 4.45 - 11.15 - 10.27 - very
good in it'th wa`y
The thurprithing thing a`bout Ma`a`zel'th rea`ding ith tha`t it conveyth a`
da`rker= a`uthterity, whiltht being quite a bit f5a`thter.
This (Thhit, there we go a`ga`in)
Hopeleth
Got to get thingth f5ixed, but i a`m thure you will enj6oy the Herbtht
IV-VII.
ath an athide, I will be thome time thorting thingth out (a` new PC or a`
new MM k=eyboa`rd)
da`MN
Regards,
# RMCR Contributor Links/Main Page :
# http://www.users.bigpond.com/hallraylily/index.html
< there is no such thing as a bad orchestra, only a bad conductor >: HvK
Ray, Sydney
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.344 / Virus Database: 191 - Release Date: 2/04/02
Curtis Croulet
What the hell is all of this about?
Heck51
> for the performance but here is a conductor who knows more about
> Sibelius' music than most of us know about putting on our trousers."
My only exposure to Vanska/Sibelius has been rather negative.
his complete Karelia music is really a flop.
He simply doesn't approach Barbirolli/Halle in the rousing suite
selections - Intermezzo and ala Marcia. Sir John and the Halle produce
this wonderful, swaggering, rollicking rendition that leaves Vanska'
limp, lethargic version in the dust.
Vanska's overture doesn't do much either - again, wan and wimpy,
compared with Gibson's robust Scottish Nat'l Orchestra version.
I'd be interested to hear some other Sibelius from Vanska, but I'm not
about to spend $$$ on it, sound unheard.
Paul Kintzele
Curtis Croulet wrote:
>
> > Plea`th rea`d th F%OR a`n S...etc...etc
>
> What the hell is all of this about?
Possibilities:
a) Ray has become a Quaker, and is trying out his 17th century English.
b) Ray, while enjoying a juicy steak, accidentally bit the tip of his
tongue. While the stitches heal, the doctor has said he will have to
talk around the bandages, giving him, among other impediments, a rather
bad lisp. Ray, not wanting to violate doctor's orders, has decided to
lisp in print for the time being, too.
c) Ray spilled something on his keyboard. After cleaning it up, he
decided to write in a strange dialect in order to mystify regular
readers of rmcr and "shake things up a bit."
d) Like that French novelist who wrote an entire novel without the
letter "e," Ray has undertaken to post to rmcr without a lowercase "s,"
to show that, with the death of an organic artistic tradition, the only
restrictions are those we (arbitrarily) impose on ourselves. By
discarding the easy crutch of the lowercase "s," Ray shows that artists
can be free even when their means of expression is constrained. The
next letter to be eliminated will be "t." Ray ultimately imagines a
typographical equivalent to the 12-tone row; his detractors call it
"analphabetism," but Ray prefers the term "panalphabetism."
Paul
Paul Goldstein
sgfn...@compuserve.com says...
I agree fully with Ward about Vanska's Sibelius 4 recording. It is
stupor-inducing, a rare miss by (I agree) an excellent conductor.
Paul Goldstein
Ward Hardman
: In article <2571d5c9.02040...@posting.google.com>,
: sgfn...@compuserve.com says...
:>
:>I'm very surprised at your dismissal of Vanska: I have no axe to grind
:>for the performance but here is a conductor who knows more about
:>Sibelius' music than most of us know about putting on our trousers. He
:>has conducted more of Sibelius' music than any of the conductors you
:>list, he understand the genisis of these works better than most and he
:>is a fine conductor (so the problem is not that he was trying to get a
:>different effect from his orchestra).Are you seriously suggesting that
:>- no matter how uncomfortable - his thoughts on Sibelius 4, they are
:>to be ignored?
: I agree fully with Ward about Vanska's Sibelius 4 recording. It is
: stupor-inducing, a rare miss by (I agree) an excellent conductor.
Part of my dismay with Vanska's tempi was that they did, indeed, put me
to sleep. Of course that means I may have missed some redeeming feature
of his approach. I heard this CD once before, after picking up the
complete 4-CD symphony set from MHS for $12 on one of their occasional
sales. That time I thought much more highly of the coupled First. I'll
try again Saturday morning when well rested and resistant to the
"lullaby effect."
One problem that too slow a tempo in the third movement poses is that the
"march-like" theme loses its shape, drive, momentum, and menace when
played as a slow series of notes. A good effect can be made in this music
in 9 minutes or less.
Here is a live Stokowski/Philadelphia performance, which I taped in 1964:
Stokowski (1964) 7:51 4:09 8:58 10:42
Except in III, where he takes 31 seconds longer, he is faster in every
movement than he was in 1932, when he may have been worried about 78 rpm
time constraints.
Can anybody give me Colin Davis' times in this opus?
Ward Hardman
: Because of that thread, I've bought Karajan's Philharmonia recordings of 4,
: 5, 6 & 7 (that's all they had at Borders in Carmel Mtn Ranch, San Diego).
Thanks to Mssrs. Wake and Croulet, I can expand the table, in order of
roughly increasing total time:
Date I II III IV Total
Gibson (1983) 8:00 4:51 7:39 9:15 28:45
Collins (1954) 8:47 3:59 8:48 10:06 31:40
Stokowski (1964)* 7:51 4:09 8:58 10:40 31:38
Stokowski (1932) 8:16 4:26 8:27 10:50 31:59
Beecham (1937) 9:58 4:06 9:35 8:35 32:14
Maazel (1968) 10:17 4:06 9:07 9:13 32:43
Ashkenazy (1981) 9:38 4:32 9:23 9:13 32:46
Karajan (1965) 10:01 4:46 12:00 9:21 36:08
Karajan (1954?) 9:50 5:02 12:09 9:23 36:24
Karajan (1976) 10:38 5:27 12:49 9:49 38:43
Vanska (1997) 11:36 4:29 14:04 9:04 39:13
Bernstein (1966) 11:09 5:19 11:14 11:32 39:14
* Live Philadelphia Orchestra performance taped from FM broadcast.
I would appreciate it if somebody could send me the timings of Ormandy
'55 (Columbia) and '78 (RCA), plus Colin Davis (Boston and London).
It looks like Bernstein and Vanska are tied for slowness. Did Lenny
redo this on DGG?
Paul Kimoto
> Date I II III IV Total
> Karajan (1965) 10:01 4:46 12:00 9:21 36:08
> Karajan (1954?) 9:50 5:02 12:09 9:23 36:24
Davis/BSO (1976) 11:03 4:38 12:52 8:36 37:09
> Karajan (1976) 10:38 5:27 12:49 9:49 38:43
> I would appreciate it if somebody could send me the timings of Ormandy
> '55 (Columbia) and '78 (RCA), plus Colin Davis (Boston and London).
(See above.)
> It looks like Bernstein and Vanska are tied for slowness. Did Lenny
> redo this on DGG?
I think that LB did not redo 3, 4, or 6.
--
Paul Kimoto
This message was originally posted on Usenet in plain text. Any images,
hyperlinks, or the like shown here have been added without my consent,
and may be a violation of international copyright law.
Paul Goldstein
>I would appreciate it if somebody could send me the timings of Ormandy
>'55 (Columbia) and '78 (RCA), plus Colin Davis (Boston and London).
Davis-BSO: 11'00, 4'34, 12'48, 8'31 (from the LP)
Davis-LSO: 10'55, 4'53, 12'17, 9'13
Davis is also too slow in iii, but not as stultifying as Vanska.
Paul Goldstein
Rodger Whitlock
North) wrote:
[re Vanska]
> ...here is a conductor who knows more about Sibelius' music
> than most of us know about putting on our trousers.
I believe that rhetorical device is known as "damning with faint
praise" and presume that you didn't quite mean it the way it came
out.
There isn't a lot to know about putting on trousers...
--
Rodger Whitlock
Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
David Wake
>
> Date I II III IV Total
>
> Gibson (1983) 8:00 4:51 7:39 9:15 28:45
Beecham (1955) 8:56 4:20 8:50 9:01 31:07
> Collins (1954) 8:47 3:59 8:48 10:06 31:40
> Stokowski (1964)* 7:51 4:09 8:58 10:40 31:38
> Stokowski (1932) 8:16 4:26 8:27 10:50 31:59
> Beecham (1937) 9:58 4:06 9:35 8:35 32:14
> Maazel (1968) 10:17 4:06 9:07 9:13 32:43
> Ashkenazy (1981) 9:38 4:32 9:23 9:13 32:46
Berglund (c.1996) 9:23 5:01 9:15 9:32 33:11
> Karajan (1965) 10:01 4:46 12:00 9:21 36:08
> Karajan (1954?) 9:50 5:02 12:09 9:23 36:24
Davis (c.1976) 11:00 4:34 12:48 8:31 36:53
Berglund (1975) 10:45 4:45 11:15 10:27 37:12
Davis (1994) 10:55 4:53 12:17 9:13 37:18
> Karajan (1976) 10:38 5:27 12:49 9:49 38:43
> Vanska (1997) 11:36 4:29 14:04 9:04 39:13
> Bernstein (1966) 11:09 5:19 11:14 11:32 39:14
> * Live Philadelphia Orchestra performance taped from FM broadcast.
David
Curtis Croulet
1953.
Raymond Hall
news:3CAC8976...@english.upenn.edu...
|
|
| Curtis Croulet wrote:
| >
| > > Plea`th rea`d th F%OR a`n S...etc...etc
| >
| > What the hell is all of this about?
|
| Possibilities:
|
| decided to write in a strange dialect in order to mystify regular
| readers of rmcr and "shake things up a bit."
Henceforth known as Sherlock <g>
Nice notes Paul. Yes, like Schoenberg, I much prefer the term
panalphabetism. Basically, whilst engaging in a "pure spring water thread",
some Sydney tap water got spilled over the keyboard, and hitting the "s" was
causing the PC to go haywire (also all the middle row of letters were doing
strange things).Anyway, fortunately I was pleasantly surprised to find out
how cheap keyboards are now. A new Microsoft 112 character one costing the
same as a full price CD. A lesson to always have a spare one at hand.
Anyway, to re-iterate my post that Curtis couldn't get to the tonal centre
of, I'll repeat it :-
Maazel's VPO timing for Sibelius IV = 10.12 - 4.02 - 9.03 - 9.14 is an
excellent reading and with a very austere 1st movement - real icy.
Berglund's/Bournemouth timing for IV = 10.45 - 4.45 - 11.15 - 10.27 - very
good in it's way, and Berglund always seems to have a more spacious, yet
unerringly direct approach that may be unappealing to those new to Sibelius.
The surprising thing about Maazel's reading is that it conveys a darker
austerity than Berglund's, whilst being quite a bit faster.
But I am sure that Curtis will enjoy the Herbster's DG readings of IV - VII.
He always had something to say when it came to Sibelius.
Raymond Hall
news:3cac5f6a....@news.newsguy.com...
| On 4 Apr 2002 01:44:01 -0800, sgfn...@compuserve.com (Stephen
| North) wrote:
|
| [re Vanska]
|
| > ...here is a conductor who knows more about Sibelius' music
| > than most of us know about putting on our trousers.
|
| I believe that rhetorical device is known as "damning with faint
| praise" and presume that you didn't quite mean it the way it came
| out.
|
| There isn't a lot to know about putting on trousers...
Very true, but when it comes to Sibelius then I bet Berglund can pull his on
much quicker than Vanska can.
TM
This sort of meaningless exercise in pedantry is profoundly unmusical
and tells us nothing about the performances. I once listened to a
live performance of a Beethoven piano concerto and remarked how slow
it was, but later realised that in terms of beats per minute it was
considerably *quicker* than I was used to! So perception of tempo is
much more subtle than simply a matter of how long something lasts.