I know these performances from the Lahti Symphony under Vänskä have been touched upon elsewhere on the forum, but I thought a dedicated thread would perhaps allow a concentration of posters' impressions. The following is my post pasted from another forum:


Sibelius: Symphony No. 5 (Original 1915 version); En Saga (Original 1892 version)
Lahti Symphony Orchestra
Osmo Vänskä, cond.
BIS
That I've recently been heavily into Sibelius, as well as harboring an aching curiosity, has lead me to finally hear these "world premiere" recordings released by Bis in the mid-'90s. If one knows and loves the "revised" Fifth Symphony of 1919, one listen to the 1915 original will come as both an ear-opener and a relief that Sibelius eventually thought better and went back to the drawing board (twice, as it were). The familiar tunes are still there, "pre-worked" into some fine and interesting progressions that lead to nowhere in particular. The biggest shock is probably the conclusion of the second movement (Sibelius fused and reworked the first two movements in the final revision) where the expected big build-up to an exciting crescendo ultimately peters, pukes, sputters, halts to the grossest, most egregious instance of musicus interruptus imaginable! Oh well. Otherwise, the finale actually sounds fairly cohesive and satisfyingly complete; in a couple spots there's a fascinating overlap of incongruent themes which will catch anyone's ear! It's something I could certainly live with as I never truly comprehended the need for the exaggeratedly spaced "hammerblows" which conclude the well-known final version.

I found the original En Saga to be as intriguing and dramatic as the revision, if perhaps not as refined and coherent. The variety of "feelings" conveyed as well as dynamic diversity (during an extended transitional phrase, we hear nothing but super-ppp strings...barely!) makes the listening an adventure and a treat, sort of like rough-hewn pieces of broken-off dark chocolate inundated with unknown goodies. The avid Sibelian would probably enjoy hearing this.

I feel that the final 1919 version of the fifth operates on a more exalted level than the original 1915. In particular, in the huge first movement the way that Sibelius transforms its Brucknerian dawning into a dynamic scherzo, must be accounted one of the most original achievements in large scale composition.
I think too, that the andante mosso-quasi allegretto is more finely crafted than in the 1915 version. But lets be honest, Sibelius dropped some fantastic music from this movement including a lovely woodwind chorale towards the end that was to form the basis of the finale's opening.
I sit between two stools as regards the last movement. In the 1915 version things are more expansive, when the bell like theme first appears on the horns, the lovely counter melody on woodwind, at this stage only appears in embryonic form and the symphony seems to struggle all the more in reaching its mighty goal.
The final version is undoubtedly the more finished work of art, but I find the 1915 finale to be awsome in its own way.--kullervopete.

I'm in total agreement with Kullervopete.

Musicus interruptus - hmmm... if you are referring to Sibelius, he did have six daughters, so I guess he wasn't interrupted all that often... (or did you mean musica interrupta?)

chuckle...

Whatever.

-Moldyoldie (humungus latinus ignoramus)

The revised 5th is certainly the preferable version. The 1915 version is a little darker and sounds, at times, unsure of itself. When Sibbe revised it, gone are any doubts and the music rises to moments of amazing heroics and divine granduer.

The revised En Saga is also preferable. Sibbe refined it without making it sound refined. It has more impact its slightly shorter and direct form.

As for the recording itself, it is very well played and conducted (how can you go wrong with Vänskä and Lahti?), but the sound levels are a little on the low side. What I wouldn't give to hear both original versions in better, more modern sound. En Saga especially suffers from sound that is too low and distant to be impactful.

I ended up buying the Tone Poems box from the Sibelius Edition a few months ago (original versions of Oceanides (that would be the Yale version, actually), Finlandia (Finland Awakes), Lemminkainen movements 1, 3, 4, Cassazione, In memoriam, En Saga, etc.).

Finland Awakes is really not at all different from Finlandia except for the end, during which the whole hymn is played out in time instead of the twice-as-slow fragment of the theme in the finalized version. It's really cool to listen to as a novelty, but I realize that it drew out the climax just a bit too much.

The Yale version of the Oceanides, however, is wildly different from the one we know today. I'll need to listen to this one a bit more (along with the final one), but what I've heard is quite a bit darker than the final one (in part at least because it is in D-flat major, a half-step lower and thus deeper in its general timbral quality). The themes are also introduced in wildly different ways. Whereas in the final version of the Oceanides one has an image of a clear blue sky with birds flying carefree-like, making their songs, the D-flat Oceanides has a very foggy beginning, as I recall, with the birds still there, but it's still a gloomier ocean setting. I would almost go as far as to say that it fortells the Seventh Symphony and Tapiola, with these themes rising, as it were, out of the mists.

I haven't listened much to any of the others (with their counterparts) yet, but when I do I'll be sure to come back here.

I have to disagree with World Violist regarding 'Finland Awakes' with the alternative ending. Lets face it, the famous 'hymn' melody that Sibelius penned is one of the most beautiful tunes ever written and I have often regret that Sibelius had not 'milked' it a bit more--its over to quick. Its great then to hear the hymn a second time on the brass with the rest of the orchestra doing some marvellous stuff as well.--kullervopete.

I do agree that the original ending is spectacular, and I do agree that the hymn is one of the more beautiful things Sibelius would write. I just think the brass playing it all the way through just doesn't sound quite right after hearing it in all its tenderness in the woodwinds and strings. It seems a bit too brash for my liking.

Though I also must admit that I too love the orchestra writing in that part. I was smiling at the genius of it the whole time I first heard it. Just... the brass! I'll listen to it a little more, though.

Regarding the 'Yale' Oceanides, I would be inclined to think that if Sibelius had taken it a bit further (i.e. if he had rehearsed and performed it), he would already have made quite a few changes to the details of the scoring. At times it's very difficult for the players (not helped by being in D flat major) and yet the details just don't come through as I suspect the composer would have wanted. As it turned out, of course, he chose a more radical solution.

There are two (that I know of) versions of Finland Awakes, which have different endings.

I'm talking about the CD "Finland Awakes" on BIS with Vanska/Lahti. There's the first original version which is played in the context of the complete Press Celebration Music.

The very last track of the CD is yet another verion of Finland Awakes with another alternate ending. THIS is the ending I like. (Are you guys talking about the same one?) In fact, I have two favorite recordings of Finlandia, and this is one of them. (Other favorite being Karajan/Berlin on EMI.)

The ending is indeed more drawn out than Sibbe's final version, but I don't see that as a negative. It's even more dramatic here. And those swirling strings that play underneath the hymn are first class goosebump causers.

And, thankfully, Vanska gives a muscular interpretation to the rest of the music making it, in my eyes, one of the best Finlandias ever recorded, original ending or not.

Thanks for pointing out the other version from the Press celebrations music. I think we were all talking about the last track on Vanska's Cd with the alternative ending. But the 'tableau 6' version from the press celebrations music is interesting, but its ending seems a bit contrived by Sibelius's standards. But lets remember the circumstances in which all this music came to be written.--kullervopete.

Oh, so everyone was talking about the final track on the Vanska/Lahti CD after all.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who loves that alternate ending. The triumphant brass majestically repeating the famous hymn...it really is very powerful!

I wonder what prompted Sibelius to shorten it to the ending that is best known today. I can fully undserstand the changes he made to the 5th, for example, but I wonder what his thinking was. Finlandia's original ending was really good!

Kinda make you wonder if he ever had any intention of revising Kullervo. Based on his revision tendancies, what kinds of changes do you think he would have made to Kullervo had he been given the chance?

He would have taken away those quick repeated oboe notes in the first movement for a start.

Otherwise, it's almost a cliché to say so, but I suppose he would have made it shorter, more integrated, better balanced internally, smoother. But (unlike some passages in the original En saga), Kullervo has such a rich and co-ordinated sound already that it would have been difficult to change much without destroying the essence of the piece.

Yes, he would have made it shorter, more smooth. I agree. I also wonder if (besides the oboe you mentiond, Andrew) if he would have further reduced the orchestration.

Kullervo works because it so big and rough-hewn. I'm happy that he never had the chance to monkey with this score. Had he made it more "clear" and more "refined," I think the score would not be nearly as powerful as we know it.

But one never knows. I actually think the revised En Saga works beter than the original. And just about everyone, no doubt, is happy he revised the 5th. So maybe a revised Kullervo wouldn't have been so bad after all?

Heh... he would've burned Kullervo and you all know it.

I don't know what he could have done with the text things... I wonder if he might have taken the text out entirely and made it another "Legends" suite? That may have been pretty interesting.

And if it was burned, one still has the question of where the thematic material would go, since he would have used it in something else... unless it was after the 1940's or something.

I have always assumed that although Sibelius intended to revise Kullervo, he never got round to it. I have come across a review on the net, of Segerstam's Helsinki Kullervo recording by Charles T. Downey, dated July, 2008. Downey states that 'Sibelius did not publish the score during his lifetime, although he was working on a revision, of which he completed only the third movement at the time of his death'. Can anyone substantiate this?--kullervopete.

I haven't heard anything at all that supports or substantiates Charles T. Downey's claim. It sounds extremely far-fetched and I would be very keen to see his evidence. If such a revision existed, for sure Glenda Dawn Goss would have included it in her painstakingly researched critical edition (Breitkopf & Härtel / JSW).

Could this be a reference to "Kullervo's Lament" that appears on the "Spirit of Nature" recording with Vanska/Lahti? I suppose this really isn't a revision so much as it's an arrangement of one little part of the greater "Kullervo and His Sister" movement.