[Brahmsianhorn]

I am not a fan of complete cycles, but I have come to the conclusion that the most consistently satisfying modern version is this one. Consistently good interpretations across the board with beautiful playing from the Berlin Philharmonic.

 

[Merl]

Like many have said there are plenty of very good recordings that you can pick up fairly inexpensively. In the past year or so many complete sets have appeared regularly for under £5 (either slightly used on Amazon or Ebay or even brand new). Of these the ones below are great value.

Rattle / VPO
Weller / CBSO (2 parts)
Zinman / Tonhalle
Edlinger & Halasz / Zagreb PO
Karajan / BPO 85
Gielen / SWR (I picked this up last week)
Szell / Cleveland
Mackerras / RLPO
Blomstedt / Dresden

All these are very good or better sets yet all have appeared at knockdown prices online in the past year. You wouldn't be disappointed if you received any of these. One day I'll get round to posting that list of my 106 complete (or near complete) Beethoven cycles for Johnnie B.

 

[Brahmsian Colors]

Complete set: the '62/'63 Karajan/Berlin

individual: #3---Cluytens/Berlin and Szell/Cleveland
#5---Karajan '63 and Solti/Vienna Phil., still my favorite 5ths
#7---Reiner/Chicago and Bernstein/NY Phil; his '69 version, not the earlier '59
#9---Reiner/Chicago

 

[Merl]

I've gradually warmed to Dudamel's complete cycle. At first I was disappointed that it wasnt high octane like his DG pairings of the 5th and 7th but his revised readings have a lot more colour and inner detail. I particularly like his choices for the 4th, 6th and 8th. I've been revisiting Mackerras' RLPO cycle this week. I've gotta say I still enjoy it slightly more than his later cycle. It's a bit rough round the edges at times but the sheer enthusiasm of the music-making makes it a thoroughly enjoyable set. As Jim Prideaux will confirm i still rate Maag's cycle extremely highly. He just seems to judge tempi so well and the playing is so spirited. Not heard all of Tilson Thomas' San Francisco recordings yet but the 2nd is very impressive, the 7th is similarly solid and rewarding and the 9th is brilliant. Looking forward to hearing more from Tilson Thomas. Much better than his haphazard ECO cycle from years ago.

 

[staxomega]

I will have to add another favorite and this is Toscanini's 1939 cycle, I finally managed to find this box set on Immortal Performances which has the best sound quality of any I've heard with great detail and an open sound since the high end isn't filtered or choked by noise reduction. Of course sound quality is relative given the nature of these early recordings.

These are not as brisk as his 50s recordings (though not slow!) and are fiery performances.

 

[Konsgaard]

Berlin Staatskapelle and Daniel Barenboim. This is hands down the best recorded set I have heard and I've heard most of them. I am referring to the recorded sound. But the performances are also among the best (if you don't mind the Furtwanglerian approach). I find both Abbado sets with the BPO of average sound quality. Chailly's sound is excellent, the performances are impressive but lacking in soul in my opinion. Wand's set with NDR (a digital set remastered in 24bit sound) offers both impressive recorded sound with really strong performances. In fact, when Gramophone magazine used to have its recordings guide, the Wand set was top choice for a Beethoven symphony set.

 

[Paulg]

It is this very subject that brought me to this forum and it has been very enlightening.

The only symphonic cycle I had ever owned up to this time was Christoph von Dohnanyi, The Cleveland Orchestra, 1989, Telarc. The disc containing the ninth had a continuous low-level hum throughout, so was unfit to play. I replaced this with a single by Lorin Maazel, The Cleveland Orchestra, 1979, CBS Masterworks.

You get used to what you have, and I always thought these works sounded good on my gear, but I was willing to go in search of a more recent work that would hold promise of being superior sonically -- as in modern recording methods, direct to digital, and so forth.

So I went for the Chailly, in part also because I was aware of the metronome markings debate and I was very curious about that. It is, to say the least, interesting. But, as someone else has remarked here, it's much like sightseeing from a race car. As I say, you get used to what you have. It's hard to have something you love changed like that.

It isn't clear to me yet that this Chailly recording is superior to my older discs. I need to spend more time with it, perhaps. I am going to purchase another round of these works after further study of the posts in this thread. It is difficult to know what to try next. I believe that what I want is rendition to which I have become accustomed with better presence and dynamic range.

 

[Merl]

It is this very subject that brought me to this forum and it has been very enlightening.

The only symphonic cycle I had ever owned up to this time was Christoph von Dohnanyi, The Cleveland Orchestra, 1989, Telarc. The disc containing the ninth had a continuous low-level hum throughout, so was unfit to play. I replaced this with a single by Lorin Maazel, The Cleveland Orchestra, 1979, CBS Masterworks.

You get used to what you have, and I always thought these works sounded good on my gear, but I was willing to go in search of a more recent work that would hold promise of being superior sonically -- as in modern recording methods, direct to digital, and so forth.

So I went for the Chailly, in part also because I was aware of the metronome markings debate and I was very curious about that. It is, to say the least, interesting. But, as someone else has remarked here, it's much like sightseeing from a race car. As I say, you get used to what you have. It's hard to have something you love changed like that.

It isn't clear to me yet that this Chailly recording is superior to my older discs. I need to spend more time with it, perhaps. I am going to purchase another round of these works after further study of the posts in this thread. It is difficult to know what to try next. I believe that what I want is rendition to which I have become accustomed with better presence and dynamic range.

I'll be reviewing the Dohnanyi cycle in my own 'best of the rest' Beethoven cycles (the ones Granate doesn't cover in his Beethoven round-up). What I will say is try the Skrowaczewski / Saarbrucken cycle. It has comparable speeds to Dohnanyi (but sometimes much brisker) but the sound is better and more realistic. Otherwise you should investigate Szell's classic Cleveland cycle if you want something along the lines of Dohnanyi (tempo-wise). Great sound for its age (stereo analogue) and far more convincing than Dohnanyi in all respects. Szell's 4th, 7th and 9tth are classics.

 

[Granate]

Awwww, welcome to Talk Classical, Paulg. Thank you for your small contribution, and have a great time in this forum looking for answers.

Merl, I have decided to count with the Pletnev cycle all of a sudden in Table 3. I'm currently listening to a surprisingly powerful No.4. I don't know if I should review the Skrowaczewski cycle in one of the German tables. I'm afraid that it is as lightweight (though really intelligent) as the Bruckner cycle.

 

[Merl]

Awwww, welcome to Talk Classical, Paulg. Thank you for your small contribution, and have a great time in this forum looking for answers.

Merl, I have decided to count with the Pletnev cycle all of a sudden in Table 3. I'm currently listening to a surprisingly powerful No.4. I don't know if I should review the Skrowaczewski cycle in one of the German tables. I'm afraid that it is as lightweight (though really intelligent) as the Bruckner cycle.

Don't bother reviewing the Skrowaczewski (you'll give it a terrible review but I'm gonna do the opposite - lol), I'll do that but yep go ahead with the Pletnev. Btw, listen to the start of Pletnev's Pastoral. He's a little bit quick. Sounds like He's driving thru the countryside in a dragster. Hahaha.

 

[starthrower]

Great thread. After listening to a ton of samples, I'm sold on the Barenboim set recorded in the 90s. And for 12 dollars its a no brainer. Best sound goes to Jansons on BR Klassik, but the performances are too polite.

 

[DavidA]

Berlin Staatskapelle and Daniel Barenboim. This is hands down the best recorded set I have heard and I've heard most of them. I am referring to the recorded sound. But the performances are also among the best (if you don't mind the Furtwanglerian approach). I find both Abbado sets with the BPO of average sound quality. Chailly's sound is excellent, the performances are impressive but lacking in soul in my opinion. Wand's set with NDR (a digital set remastered in 24bit sound) offers both impressive recorded sound with really strong performances. In fact, when Gramophone magazine used to have its recordings guide, the Wand set was top choice for a Beethoven symphony set.

Must confess I find Barenboim pretty insufferable in Betthoven symphonies. The Furtwangler approach without the seeming spontaneity of Furtwangler so it seems contrived

 

[starthrower]

What about the London Symphony conducted by Butt? Never heard of this conductor, but it sounds good.

 

[DavidA]

What about the London Symphony conducted by Butt? Never heard of this conductor, but it sounds good.

It sounds good but....:lol:

 

[starthrower]

That's what I was thinking!

 

[starthrower]

What is the Furtwangler approach? I noticed The orchestra under Barenboim has a very heavy and dense string sound.

 

[SixFootScowl]

What about the London Symphony conducted by Butt? Never heard of this conductor, but it sounds good.

Can't be the same Butt as the one who conducts the Dunedin Consort, Scotland's leading Baroque Ensemble?

 

[SixFootScowl]

I am sticking with this as one of my top cycles. Just the symphonies, no other baggage. And note they are in order, which indicates a faster tempo (or hopefully not cuts). Sound is quite good for the age of this one (circa 1950).

 

[starthrower]

I'm looking for a set in modern sound.

 

[starthrower]

Yondani Butt is his name. The Beethoven set is on the Nimbus label.