|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
67.161.34.228
I have long felt that Klemperer's recordings of Fidelio and the Missa Solemnis are standards for those works, but I had heard few of Klemperer's recordings of Beethoven symphonies, having felt warned off by his reputation for slow tempos, and the poor overall evaluation given by Paul Henry Lang in the circa 1970 review in High Fidelity of the then existing recordings of Beethoven symphonies available on the US market. Lang could often be very right in his evaluations - for example, his review of the Toscanini set is just about dead on to my ears.
Well, listening and forming your own judgements is really the best way forward, although I think these days it would be next to impossible for a single reviewer to survey all of the available sets and make recommendations...just too many recordings - we have had a flood of complete Beethoven sets since the early 70s, and a lot of others have been resurrected.
Anyway, I found an unplayed set of the early 70s reissue of these symphonies, on 9 LPs and on EMI, on eBay for a somewhat reasonable price (shipping was a little pricey), but this set is gorgeous.
Overall impressions: first, Klemperer is not ALWAYS slow - there are a number of lively tempos, and by the way he maintains good rhythm throughout, so even some of the slower tempos are well-sprung. There is the famous Klemperer quote, when asked if a certain tempo was very slow "you will get used to it". Clearly he believed in his tempos, and they were an interpretive choice, not something due to age . One of the more interesting passages in Heyworth's Conversations with Klemperer" is Klemperer's remarks about Mahler and his ability to make you believe in his tempo, that it was the right one. In general most of his tempo didn't concern me too much, and the offset is the wealth of detail Klemperer finds - details you have never heard before - the overall line, and the beautiful playing of the Philharmonia.
The next thing is how forward he puts the winds, and also the benefits in clarity through the use of divided strings.
In general, the set works very well, and the major disappointment is the performance of the 5th, which seems incredibly static as a performance, and features very odd tempo fluctuations in the first movement. There are loads better 5ths - Szell, Karajan, and Vanska would be 3 that I recommend (I am not a big fan of the famous C. Kleiber 5th - I find it externalized and over-muscular, which I recognize is a minority opinion).
The 7th is just so-so but I find the Eroica and Pastorale to be marvelous performances, and the 9th to be one of the all-time great performances. I also enjoyed the "lesser symphonies" - 1, 2, 4 and 8. And my set features all of the ancillary works also recorded by Klemperer.
Anyway, I am about 50 years late to this party.....but better late than never. This set is a keeper. Wouldn't be my first choice (I would recommend Szell for that), but Klemperer had a lot of interesting things to say.
Follow Ups:
I have the Bohm and half the von Karajan sets but this topic inspired a more in-depth comparison of the Epic and Columbia Masterworks sets.
I'm comparing the first movements of each, then playing the full symphony of the winner; all 17 vacuum tubes will be hot all day.
I was told years ago that the original Epic Dvorak 3 symphonies Szell/Cleveland trounced the Masterworks set and it did. Later, I also acquired the Beethoven to see if the same was true. I never really got around to a thorough listening until today.
Through the Eroica, the Epic Stereo, SB 6050, has slightly better instrumental tone and timbre but the imaging truncates the Violins and Cellos into an almost monaural center; Woodwind duets and trios likewise. Apparently these recordings span a period from 1954 to 1970 so perhaps the Epic engineers were doing their best going from Mono to Stereo with the equipment at hand. Googling a discography was unhelpful...anyone have info on whether this is the case?
The Masterworks re-master has a true wall-to-wall soundstage as good as any recording I've heard and the instruments are right where they belong. There's a touch more "Columbia Glare" of the Trumpets and Horns.
The performance of One is very energetic, Two not as much. I've probably participated as a player of Three as much as a listener so I don't have an opinion on Szell's reading except that it's crisp and orthodox. One, Six, and Seven are my favorites and I'm looking forward to the latter two later today.
kitch29, you look like a vinyl guy. I'm using digital formats. The Original jacket set of Szell Beethoven symphonies seems to me to have better sound than the Essential Classics CDs.
my blog: http://carsmusicandnature.blogspot.com/
There is a different Klemperer Beethoven 9th on Testament. Also some Mozart.
my blog: http://carsmusicandnature.blogspot.com/
Actually, there are two of them, both with the Philharmonia Orchestra.
Testament SBT 1177 is a live recording from November 15, 1957, featuring exactly the same forces as the commercial EMI recording (recorded around the same time). Not only is it a more exciting and dramatic performance, but sonically, it is vastly superior to EMI's effort (at least on CD - I haven't heard an LP version).
SBT 1332 is a performance from November 27, 1961, with Giebel, Ludwig, Lewis, and Berry. Another great performance - a pity that this one is monaural (the 1957 is stereo).
If I had to choose a Beethoven set besides Furtwangler, it would be Klemperer......
We all have different reactions. One reviewer said that Furtwangler is a traveler who likes to stop to look at the flowers along the way. That was quite charitable, IMO. What he sounds like to me is a frustrated composer who wishes that he had composed the Beethoven symphonies, and damn right he is going to show you and Beethoven what Beethoven should have written. I find listening to Furtwangler conduct Beethoven to be incredibly intrusive. I don't feel that way with Klemperer, in general.
I have heard Furtwangler do the Eroica, the 5th and the 9th (3 different recordings, which to my mind are more alike in their eccentricities than they are different, which means that he wasn't making it up on the podium, like many think - his interpretations were carefully studied).
Interestingly, Klemperer felt that Toscanini, and not Furtwangler, was the greatest conductor of his time. None of them compared to Mahler, of course, in his opinion.
Many listeners I respect admire Furtwangler's way with Beethoven. It is definitely not for me.
That said, didn't care for his take on the other Beethoven symphonies.His Brahms OTOH has spoiled me for all other performances. Furt can change gears more smoothly than a Lexus. He actually makes Brahms sound like a profound, cosmic guy. And his Wagner?? If I die, I've instructed my brother to toss a memory stick of his Tristan and '50 Ring Cycle into the pyre. (Not as dramatic as watching vinyl melt but hey: I'm with the times.
Edits: 01/31/17
specious soundbites take on a life of their own.
I recall one person mentioning how crappy Scherchen's VSO sounded in the Beethoven Symphonies, but he neglected to mention that others were recorded with Beecham's crack Royal Phil.
The third synphony has an inevitability about it that can be overwhelming. I'm also a fan of Szell's set, so I'm curious, what did Paul Henry Lang have to say about Toscanini's Beethoven?
It was lengthy (btw, you can find used copies of "The Recordings of Beethoven, as viewed by the critics from High Fidelity), on Amazon. I had an original for years, then discarded it when it fell apart. Bought a hardback a couple of years ago - very nostalgic for me.
Anyway, he says things like Toscanini misjudges the climax of the 6th - I agree - that some of the tempos in the 9th are too fast - I also agree, that the performance of the 5th is terrific but with very poor sound - right again to my ears. Given what I have read recently about the restoration of the 30s cycles on Immortal Performances, and then my own experience with his NYPO 7th (my very favorite recording of the 7th) - I don't think we hear Toscanini's best work in the late in life RCA set.
When I first heard Toscanini, (a long time ago), I thought that the different sections of the orchestra were pitted against eachother and by doing this, were getting the music wrong. I was using Szell as a standard of comparison, and in his recording, I heard the different sections blended together to form musical phrases where their individual identities were lost in the overall sound. Klemperer seems to be doing the same thing.
. . . acquire a very satisfying momentum in their own way - a kind of inevitability (even in the Fifth Symphony, which you rightly describe as a bit static - especially in the finale). They're not my favorites (even from that era), but you're right that no one tempo fits all.
I believe I read in one of Leinsdorf's books that, in his youth, he believed that finding just the exact "right" tempo was high among factors in a successful performance. As Leinsdorf matured, I think he began to place less and less importance on that idea.
Thank you for the review. I have several of these performances in various forms. Klemp on Eroica mono and stereo are excellent. Ninth is around here somewhere. I also have a reissued sealed 6th, others.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: