The last movement of Sibelius's first symphony is marked 'Quasi una Fantasia'. After the first appearance of that broad romantic melody, the agitated allegro molto returns. The music is now akin to some hunted animal charging through those Northern forests. But suddenly Sibelius halts the flow for a moment [In Osmo Vanska's recording with Lahti symphony Bis CD 861] we are at 5'-29''. It seems to me that this pause is pretty important, its like our hunted animal suddenly 'freezes' for a second before resuming his dash. Their seem to be three distinct schools of interpretation here. Lets start with those maestro's who make a clear pause here. Checking my collection I find the following:

Barbirolli and Halle, Bernstein and Vienna P.O., Sanderling and Berlin S.O., Ormandy and Philadelphia, Segerstam and Helsinki P.O, Beecham and Royal P.O, Berglund and Bournmouth S.O, and Carl von Garaguly and Dresden P.O.

Next we come to those conductors who just about pay lip-service to a pause, its rather fleeting and can go un-noticed.

Vanska and Lahti S.O, Kamu and Helsinki Radio S.O, Rattle and Birmingham S.O, and Maazel with Vienna P.O.

Finally the biggest mavericks of all, those maestro's who do not pause at all. Presumably they do not wish to break the momentum at this point. My list includes:

Stokowski and Nat. P.O, Anthony Collins and London S.O, Karajan and Berlin P.O, and Jose Serebrier with Melbourne S.O.
Listening to Maris Jansons Prom relay from London recently with the Concertgebouw, he too did not pause!

Anybody else agree with me that Sibelius had good reason to indicate a pause at this point in the score and conductors [even great Sibelians] should follow his intention.--kp

I believe the place you are referring to is letter "L" in the last movement. There is an apostrophe on the bar line.

In general, this musical marking denotes the shortest of pauses, simply a "luftpause" or simply a breath. The break should not be rythmically measured, or he could have simply inserted a 3/4 bar with a quarternote rest or even a full 2/4 bar if he had wanted a full bar's rest. If he had wanted the pause longer, the traditional fermata over the bar line would be appropriate.

So I think your second group got it right, Vanska, Kamu etc. Just a breath, anything longer would have called for a different mark in the score.

The analogy with a hunted animal 'freezing' is very apt in this case!

These Luftpausen occur in many other works as well and yes, as Kurki says, the indication should be heeded, but quite clearly does not call for a long pause. A further example of it is in the Musette from King Christian II (though the Luftpause is marked only in the concert suite version - not in the original score or piano transcription). There are also some cases in the beginning of the first movement of the original score (used at the first performance) of the Second Symphony - a passage that was revised in metrical terms between première and publication.

Scholars have (to some extent) examined Sibelius's use of this device and I think the general view is that he normally intended to convey a perceptible but very short pause. This fits in with the approach taken by the 'second group' of conductors.

Thanks guys for the benefit of your wisdom here. Its been one of those moments in the first symphony that as puzzled me for years. Certainly for me, a clear pause or a fleeting pause is more effective in the musical argument at this point than those conductors who completely ignore the 'luftpause' indication so as not to halt the momentum.--kp