I just got the Berglund cycle (from the EMI "Budget Box Sets") along with several tone poems as a birthday present--probably my best birthday present. It's far, far better than anything I've heard from either Maazel or Davis. The timing, tempi, everything I've heard just yet is perfection... but I've not listened to the whole set just yet, as I just got it today through the mail.

While I like the Berglund set as a whole, especially in terms of its sound and mood, there is one glaring problem to my mind and ear, and that is the handling of the tempos in the 7th symphony. In short, after the opening minute, Berglund takes the string chorale almost twice as fast as the music that comes before it. While some flexibility in tempo is necessary and tasteful, I find this to be a bad solution.

Click

Only registered users can see links on this forum! Register or Login on forum!

for a comparative analysis of various renditions of the 7ths opening.

Berglund's recording of the seventh didn't really do anything for me. It just wasn't... I don't know, "cosmic" enough. The trombones just seemed kind of weak (same with my Davis/BSO recording...).

I've listened to Bernstein's (NYPO) and Maazel's (VPO)... and they seem to me almost totally different. Bernstein's is typically Bernstein, the romantic-esque personality, tempo fluctuations and whatnot (probably my favorite of the two).

Maazel's I actually rather like (though, of course, I have never seen the score). It is very powerful, though now on a later listening (my Sibelian spark is beginning its re-igniting, I think) the developments are a bit more choppy and not so natural as it could (and should) be.

I'm thinking about Ashkenazy's cycle.

While I have not heard any Ashkenazy recording of a Sibelius Symphony, I found the little clips of him conducting in Nupen's film very hard to watch, as he is obviously counting out loud to himself in several places. Very distracting.

I, too, have seen Nupen's film, and, while he does count, it is mostly just in the fifth, really, at the very end with the ending chords, right?

No, the second symphony on the film and Finlandia were what made me want to get Ashkenazy's set. Now I've bought the first set (Double-Decca; Symphonies 1, 2, and 4, Finlandia, Karelia Suite), I'm a little bit disappointed, but I'll go ahead and eventually get the second part because it has my three favorite symphonies in it (3, 6, 7; also on that recording is the 5th, En Saga, and Tapiola).

You might be interested to know that Octavia have just issued a new recording of Ashkenazy and Sibelius 2 with Royal Stockholm PO
dont yet know if this is going to be a complete cycle. OVCL00292
--kullervopete.

I read this thread over and it's interesting to see my comments from quite a while ago.

I have since become acquainted with Berlund's cycle with the Helsinki band on EMI and Ashkenzy's cycle with the Philharmonia on London.

I prefer Ashkenazy's cycle to Berglund's, as I find Berglund's cycle to be generally too polite. This is strange, as Berglund usually lets 'er rip. I popped in Berglund's 4th this afternoon and the first movement is just too quiet to be effective, I think.

Ashkenazy injects the symphonies with a of drama, and he doesn't imprint as much of himself on the music as, say, Segerstam or Maazel. So, these are interpretations that come off as very authentic but not dry. His 4th I also listened too, and it's pretty damn good.

I made an earlier comment in this thread that Vanska is too restrained. I'm a little shocked at myself. His cycle is excellent and indeed one of the best ever produced. Why I said that, I don't know. Maybe I was focusing too much on his 2nd Symphony, which is the most restrained of the lot. SInce the 2nd is my favorite, and I always compare 2nd Symphonies to Maazel's, Vanska is restrained, but the rest of his output is infused with great sweep and energy.

Tapkaara wrote:

I'm a little shocked at myself ... Why I said that, I don't know.

That is the beauty of a life long devotion to anything. As we progress through time with an open mind, our thoughts, feelings and opinions progress and change as well. We reinforce old values but we also discover new ones. This for me adds excitement to my love of Sibelius and his great interpreters, that I know as much as I love one now, I may love another even more in the future.

I saw Tapkaara's latest post and have realized that I have come quite far from having only Maazel's and Berglund's boxes...

Let's see... Kamu-Karajan, Davis/BSO, Maazel/VPO, Berglund/HPO, Segerstam/HPO I have in full, plus extraneous recordings from Davis/LSO Live (3&7 - 5&6 on the way), Bernstein/NYPO (4-7), Ashkenazy (1, 2, 4)... I can't remember any others...

I can't choose a favorite yet. They all have very distinctive highs and lows. I could probably pick and choose favorites, but that wouldn't be in line with this thread at all, would it...

The notable exception from this list is Vanska/Lahti, and I'm still keeping by that post I made months ago and am waiting for it to come out in the Sibelius Edition recording next year.

It will be something to look forward to, WV, and I think we'll have some nice little additional surprises in that volume as well. According to current planning it will be released at the 2010 Sibelius Festival in Lahti (September) along with the final, Miscellaneous box – which will include the Masonic music that everybody keeps asking about (my colleagues at BIS Headquarters tell me that no single work by Sibelius is the subject of more letters of enquiry than the Masonic music!).

Meanwhile there's another orchestral box in April (2009) – BIS-CD-1921/23 – which will include a number of previously unpublished Lahti/Vänskä recordings and a few world premières. The 1911 Rakastava will come as a shock to anyone who knows the standard 1912 score – a pleasant one, I hope.

Andrew, are you talking abou the Masonic Music for organ?

Andrew B wrote:

The 1911 Rakastava will come as a shock to anyone who knows the standard 1912 score – a pleasant one, I hope.

Click

Only registered users can see links on this forum! Register or Login on forum!

for a sad account of my frustrating performance of Rakastava.

Yes, officially the Musique religieuse, Op. 113 – for tenor, male choir and harmonium OR organ OR piano depending on which of the many authentic versions you are listening to. Basically the music that is the main focus of Kalevi Kiviniemi's disc, but Kiviniemi omits the vocal parts. If organists sing like some conductors, that is probably a blessing.

Sounds juicy and delicious, Andrew. I'll look forward to getting my ears on this.

While I was still a six-form student in school I gradually acquired the Collins cycle on Decca Eclipse - about the only bargain price version available then. At the time the Collins account of the 1st was highly praised - I would be interested in comments on the rest of this cycle. Later I had the Barbirolli cycle, yet this one also seems to have passed almost without comment in this forum.

Chris Taylor wrote:

While I was still a six-form student in school I gradually acquired the Collins cycle on Decca Eclipse - about the only bargain price version available then. At the time the Collins account of the 1st was highly praised - I would be interested in comments on the rest of this cycle. Later I had the Barbirolli cycle, yet this one also seems to have passed almost without comment in this forum.

If you dig around a bit, I think you will find a thread devoted to John Barbirolli and his Sibelius recordings. If memory serves, there are a good few penetrating posts in this thread as well.

A warm welcome to the forum from me Chris. I just returned yesterday from an even warmer Turkey!

The Anthony Collins Sibelius cycle has always meant a great deal to me has it was amongst my first introduction to the great Finn as a young teenager in 1950's England. Collins recordings were almost the first complete cycle. In fact he was just pipped by Sixten Ehrling and Stockholm Phil. Collins account of No.1 is pretty electric stuff with a particulary prominent timpani throughout. A little later I got to know Paul Kletzki's recording [1955] with Philharmonia Orchestra and my allegiance changed. Around this time both conductors made excellent records of No.2. With the third symphony I also prefare Kletzki's version, it is more relaxed especially in the magical central movement. As a newcomer to Sibelius, Collins account of the enigmatic fourth seemed amazing, then I discovered Karajan! Collins gives eminently satisfactory accounts of symphonies 5, 6 and 7 but of course the field is now wide open. Anthony Collins set of the Sibelius symphonies is worth getting to know, its still competitive after more than 50 years.--kp

Just a little aside... did everyone notice Chris Taylor's "joined" date?

Apparently some first-rate owling for the past few years!

My opinion:

Vänskä is the best. It sound Sibelius, not Vänskä. With this recording I can listen the work, not the recording. I like his style: cameristic, modern, different colours at the same time (not a homogeneous color), nervous and exact tempos... And the right finnish style. I love the finnish interpretation of Sibelius: it's for me like historic instruments for baroque music.

I've heard Saraste only one time (I bought the CDs the last month) and maybe it could be my second favorite recording.

I like very much the Sibelius' Bernstein. Maybe it's the opposite to Vänskä: he isn't faithful to the scores. But he gives a transcendental meaning to the music. A little bit of Mahler of course but... it's terrific! The first cycle is complete, the Fourth is amazing. The second isn't full, the First and the Second are too much slow, the Fifth and de Seventh are my favourites like singles of the whole of the Sibelius recordings!

Segerstam has the finnish style, but I think that he's very slow (in the Chandos' recording too much slow) and romantic. However the Ondine cycle is quite good.

Berglund is fantastic, but I find that his colour is too dark and homogeneous. I love his intensity and strengh, but his colour isn't good for me. However all of his three cycles is pretty good.

Colin Davis is fine, either the Boston than LSO cycle.

I'm hearing the Barbirolli's cycle in these days (this evening it will sound the fifth) and he's good, but it sounds a bit old fashioned to me.

Ashkenazy is quite irregular (the Decca recordings). The First is one of the best First for me (the most russian of the symphonies), the Forth is bad.

Neeme Järvi is better for the Sibelius small pieces. His cycle for Bis is good, the DG is... psicodelic?

Karajan sometimes... no right style, but he loved Sibelius. I like very much the Kamu's recordings, they are in the same box. Okko Kamu is a wonderful Sibelius conductor!

Kajanus is very very interesanting. A pity the age of his recordings, but they're a historic document!

I don't like Simon Rattle.

I hate Rozhdestvensky. He thought that Sibelius must to be conducted like Tchaikovsky.

I haven´t hear Maazel, Blomstedt or Saderling.

Osmo Vänskä is the Sibelius symphonies cycle.

David Revilla wrote:

I don't like Simon Rattle.

Don't worry about your English, David, it's just fine.