Personally, I have always adored Bernard Haitink's Brahms Symphonies with the London Symphony Orchestra. Other cycles occasionally come close, but I've never come across another set that is as tight, well-controlled, and perfectly Brahmsian.

Of course, a special exception must always be made for Carlos Kleiber's recording of the 4th, and, though I haven't seen it appear on a CD, there is a video recording of him conducting the 2nd which is just as amazing.

 

Kleiber's brahm's fourth



jdavid says: I couldn't agree more about Kleiber's Brahm's 4th - it is my favorite recording with one exception - the 4th movement section with the big flute solo in e minor, I think, is really more than a shade too fast. It doesn't change my mind about the recording, however. And speaking of Kleiber: his Beethoven 5th Symphony (also with Weiner Philharmoniker) is the most fantastically 'over the top' recording of it I have ever heard of it - a real fire-breather!

 

I agree with Polednice that Haitink's recent cycle with the LSO is strong - and the fillers (Tragic overture, double concerto and Serenade no. 2) are very good.

I have a soft spot for the cycles by Kertesz/Wiener Phil (Decca on vinyl) and Jochum/Berliner Phil (reissued on CD). As far as the one cycle I own outright (Karajan/Berliner, analog re-issued on CD), it is not bad, but the others show more "unity of vision" in my humble opinion.

For more about the Kertesz cycle and links on YouTube, visit my blog from last Tuesday.

As for Schumann, I own the Kubelik/Berliner Phil cycle from the late 60's, which I reviewed in a blog a couple of months ago. Some people are partial to the Bernstein/Concertgebouw and the Sawalisch (with Philadelphia?) cycles, but I stand behind the Kubelik, with an honourable mention going to Mario Bernardi and the Calgary Phil on CBC records (early 90's), again because the filler material (Konzerstuck for horns and Introduction Scherzo and Finale) is excellent.

 

Don't care for Kertesz or Jochum in the Brahms. Kind of off kilter to me.
My fav is a set I picked up by Barbirolli,then Klemperer, Karajan, Bernstein, Celebidache

Schumann I love Klemperer, Kubelik (Sony), Bernstein, Haitink, Celebidache and Dohnanyi's Decca cyvle is so beautifully recorded I have to listen to it.

 

I like Haitink too, but the Concertgebouw ones. Don't care for the sound of the LSO set. I think the C set runs deeper and has that classic Philips sound.

 

my regular brahms playlist, in no particular order, is:
1, bernstein/nypo, karajan/bpo, klemperer/po
2, bernstein/nypo, haitink/lso, jansons/rco, karajan/bpo
3, bernstein/nypo, abbado/bpo, karajan/bpo
4, kleiber/vpo, karajan/bpo

i don't listen schumann's symphonies so only 4th is on my playlist, sawallisch/ds, gardiner/orr & bernstein/vpo
for "the great", i keep 6 of the many i own on the playlist, abbado/coe, bernstein/nypo, bernstein/rco, bohm/bpo, rattle/bpo, wand/bpo. i now realized that i've too many on the list so i'll reduce it to abbado, bernstein/rco and wand as soon as i finish this sentence.

 

Bernstein's Brahms second with the VPO is on my iPod, and it is (as a stand alone interpretation) my favourite.

 

Schumann: Sawallisch/Dresden Orchestra on EMI. Try the 4th for a sample.
Other interesting 4ths, albeit in mono, are Paray and Furtwängler.

 

Also, why do you think these 9 symphonies captivate me so much. They seem to go straight to my heart with every note. I never tire of them. Why?:angel:

I think there's a lot in common between Brahms and Schumann - maybe that has something to do with it. I would argue that the Schubert Great C Major is a seminal work, the perfoect bookend to the "classical" era, and an eloquent transition from the Mozart/Haydn tradition of the Symphony to the Roomantic, expansive approach of Brahms. How it fits with the Brahms and Schumann set is a mystery to me, but you can't argue personal taste, and you can't argue that the works are (in general) strong.

Some people [what do you mean... many people], will disagree with me on this point, but both sets are flawed as a set, in the sense that the symphonies aren't very consistent, or show much progression. Brahms' first (as I said in my blog) feels like somebody passing a kidney stone, and is a reflection of the labour and pain associated with its long gestation. Not to say it's not a very good or even great work, but you go from this work to the Second - what a contrast! And then the third and fourth have their definite moments, but don't have a great sense of innovation to them.

The Schumann set is flawed for other reasons - some will say Schumann wasn't a great orchestrator. I would say that Schimann is a romantic in the true sense of the word, and his best works (piano music, for example) set a "mood". He succeeds in the Spring Symphony and in the Rheinish, but I don't get that same feeling in the "even numbered" symphonies.

 

Your great, but too analytical my friend. I don't recognize flawed.
These are great art by great geniuses that move my soul. That's what I know. But I'm an emotional Itullian, you know.

 

Ironically, the symphonies of these two composers are the ones I listen to least.

For Brahms, I have the complete cycle by both Klemperer and Gardiner. I actually prefer the Gardiner, but know that feeling is not universal.

For Schumann, I have the complete cycle only by Szell. It never did anything for me, and so haven't explored any further.

 

I'll pray for you brother.

 

I don't like Gardiner in anything. cold cucumber

 

nice definition. but in recently recorded Bach's Johannes-Passion Gardiner has chosen dramatically-hysterical rendition with Padmore seeming to be insane while singing the Evangelist part (recitative 'Und siehe da, der Vorhang im Tempel zerreißt' and the following tenor aria). great failure.

BTW, my favourite Schumann was with Kurt Masur and Gewandhausorchester on mid-70-ies ETERNA vinyl.
Masur has dared to conduct Schumann using the original scores, not Mahler or Szell editions, and, thanks to Gewandhaus, got worthy result.

 

Please, this is a Gardiner free zone!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

RE: Gardiner

I hear you, but there is ONE exception for me:

That one was a smart, and at the time somewhat innovative performance, in the early days of the HIP movement.

 

ok, and his Philips Mozart symphonies were ok. that's it!

 

I favor the Brahms symphonies played by a smaller orchestra than was usual for the most of 20th century. That said, the Norrington set is bad and the Gardiner set is only good in parts, so you're left with Mackerras and Harnoncourt. I may have heard a couple of other period-style performances, but I can't remember who the conductors were at the moment.

The Haitink set that Polednice keeps mentioning is also pretty good. Karajan and Kleiber are excellent in some movements but not in others. I don't rate Kleiber's Second Symphony all that highly, although to be fair I've only heard it on Youtube. Here's what I'd regard as a good balance between modern performance practice and period practice:

 

not bad, thank you. excellent slow part.

 

Harnoncourt aaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

 

Yes, Harnoncourt. The big problem with that set is that it's not properly miked. I don't have much of a problem with the actual performances.

 

aaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

I've listened to many different versions of both of these symphony sets over a period of 40 years. Oddly enough, I find that one set of Brahms symphonies where the conductor serves the music and doesn't make the music serve him is the budget-priced set by Jaap Van Zweden and the Netherlands Philharmonic on the Brilliant Complete Brahms set. The tempi and dynamics in this set are the closest thing to perfect I've heard. The live performances with Janowski and the Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra on Pentatone are a worthwhile expensive set (SACD).

I have never found a completely satisfactory Schumann set. After 40 years of listening I stick with:

Charles Munch / Boston SO - Sym 1 & Manfred Overture
Rafael Kubelik / Berlin SO - Sym 2 & Genoveva Overture
Rene Leibowitz - Sym 3 (available on Chesky Records) - there has never been a better Rhenish
Klemperer / New Philharmonia - Sym 4

 

Does anyone have thoughts about David Zinman's Schumann cycle? A friend of mine flipped out over it. I haven't heard it enough to say either way.

 

it's a fine cycle. kind of a combo of old and new. excellent sound.

 

When you are listening to Gardiner's Brahms, you are not listening to Brahms.

Or you are not listening to Brahms as you have come to know him. It is quite possible, considering Gardiner's formidable reputation as both a conductor and musical scholar that he knows much more about Brahms than yourself and prefers to stress elements of aspects of Brahms that have been lost or downplayed in other interpretations.

I have honestly never been more horrified by a recording in my life

Someone obviously has an aversion to HIP recordings.:lol: Gardiner shakes up your staid conservative views of who Brahms was and what he should sound like. To be quite honest, the only reason I look to purchase more than one recording of a favorite work of music is because a performer or conductor has brought something quite different in the interpretation of a work of music. Personally, I love the Gardiner Brahms (including the German Requiem). Gardiner shakes the dust off of Brahms and brings a certain muscularity and transparency to music that I have often found interpreted in an overly lumpen and far to dense manner. I also like Kleiber's 4th, Bruno Walter's interpretations, Herbert von Karajan's, and Karl Bohm's.

As for Schumann. I think Karajan is too lush and grandiose... perhaps as he is with Schubert. Schumann calls for someone with a more poetic touch. Personally I enjoy two of the recordings with my hometown Cleveland Orchestra: that with George Szell, and the later recording with Christoph von Dohnányi. Once again, I also enjoy John Eliot Gardiner's interpretations.

 

Or you are not listening to Brahms as you have come to know him. It is quite possible, considering Gardiner's formidable reputation as both a conductor and musical scholar that he knows much more about Brahms than yourself and prefers to stress elements of aspects of Brahms that have been lost or downplayed in other interpretations.

Nope, I'm right.

For reference, I have no aversion to HIP recordings, Gardiner is just a giant piece of **** when it comes to Brahms. I should know, Brahms is my lover.

 

Ok,...let's see:

Brahms Um,...Polednice, a little help here!

Schumann Klavierspieler,...what's the word?!

 

I own two complete symphonic essays (Beethoven and Schumann) by Gardiner and his band (orchestra revolutionaire et romantique) but I'm certainly not throwing out my various Weiner Phil, Berlin Phil, Chicago, Concertgebouw, et al recordings of those great symphonies. However, I think Gardiner's musicality is very fine and his orchestra's colors, esp among the winds are so vivid. I'm glad for his 'stuff' - so many of the leading orchestras have the very same personality, and I think he finds 'new ground'. And speaking of orchestras, I think the New York Phil is beginning to play with more verve under Alan Gilbert - maybe the days of the jet-setting conductors are on the wane. Gardiner's art is fairly literal and not precious, I think...but just today I listened to Von Karajan w Wein in a great recording of the Schumann 4th (revised Op.120) and the Dvorak 8th in G - wow! Double wow! What a great recording and pairing of works. It makes me very glad for the modern orchestra, indeed!

 

Yes, I've heard much of his father's (Erich?) work, but so far own none of his recordings. Sorry to digress.

 

Sorry, Itullian, but I absolutely love Gardiner and Harnoncourt. They are my go-to conductors for basically anything both orchestral and Schumann. It was actually Gardiner's Schumann cycle with period instruments that first did it for me, not Bernstein, Szell or the like. Not to mention my encounter with Das Paradies und die Peri, in which Harnoncourt and Gardiner both give the composer's neglected choral music the credit its due. Harnoncourt's concerti with Argerich and Kremer aren't too shabby either - two of the best modern recordings of the piano and violin concertos, though there are a few historical recordings that trump these.

 

to each their own.:tiphat:

 

Schumann - VPO/Bernstein (DG, 1984/85)

Brahms - BPO/Karajan (DG, 1964)

 

schumann - vpo/bernstein (dg, 1984/85)

brahms - bpo/karajan (dg, 1964)

WRONG!

******* character limit

 

Manxfeeder, couldn't disagree more about the Kleiber Brahms 4!! It's a magnificent recording by any standards, except that the recording quality (early digital) isn't too flash - it hits that ceiling of over-modulation!! No matter how good my sound equipment it always flattens out and has no depth. I guess this is the legacy of early digital or ADD. But this performance has never been equalled, IMHO. And I hear the Vienna Philharmonic reasonably regularly at the Musikverein - they have never sounded so wonderful with Brahms as they did in that recording. So, the CONDUCTOR DOES MATTER!! (What a buzz to catch the train home with some members of the orchestra after these performances!! They get off at my station, too!!)

 

Kleiber Brahms 4 is too dainty for me (Note to Polednice: CK's B4 available on DG Originals for ages), as are interps of Abbado, Klemperer, and others. I like bold, and that's what HvK '64 does well.

Haitink's Brahms, and just about anything else of his in the Germanic mainstream is okay, but not benchmark. Haitink's claim for fame is live Bruckner, live Mahler, and Shostakovich. A very good career notwithstanding.

One Gardiner rec here--Berlioz "Harold".

 

Note to Poledice: CK's B4 available on DG Originals for ages

I know; it's the 2nd I can't find on disc.

 

Are my favourites, closely followed by Sawallisch's Schumann and Klemperer's Brahms.