[Kiki]

Here's an interesting story worth noting ... Klemperer did a studio recording of Petrouchka which didn't go very well. After reviewing the various takes it was decided that a good performance couldn't be assembled for release and so it was consigned to the archives. Fast forward a few decades and the folks at Testament (?) had the opportunity to review the materials and came to the conclusion that a good performance could indeed be put together from the material and did do so, albeit different from what EMI had considered. Gives a bit of pause to think.

I suppose it is not unusual for performers and producers to record and select different takes of passages to put into the final product.

According to a recording log that DG reproduced for the "Karajan 1970s" box, his Beethoven #9 was recorded over 7 sessions between 1975 and 1977. The chorus was recorded in 2 sessions that were 4 months apart, the first in Berlin, the second in Vienna; while the soloists were recorded in a separate session.

To say the obvious, the end product is certainly not a one-take, but something edited together from many takes.

It is the old cliché: a "studio" recording is an optimal presentation of a score under optimal conditions. It might give an illusion of a performance but it really is not.

Some conductors have said they prefer long takes, which is understandable, but they also know that they can repair any blemishes through patch-up takes. In fact, that applies to both "studio" and "live" recordings nowadays.

So what happened to those unused takes of this Beethoven #9? Presumably they are locked up in a basement somewhere, until, I suppose, someday someone "discovers" these tapes and come up with a brilliant commercial proposition with them.

In fact, something similar has happened to Karajan's 1955 EMI Beethoven #9. Both mono and stereo mixes exist, but over the years only the mono mix was released and re-issued many times. The stereo mix was released for the first time only in 2014. As far as the stereo mix is concerned, I think it sounds terrible; but it was a great proposition for Warner after they acquired EMI Classics and something like this would certainly arouse interest. Result: as a collector I bought it. I am sure many others did too.

By the way, I should also complain about recording dates.

Those 7 sessions of Karajan's 70s Beethoven #9 were held between 1975-01-23 & 1977-03-09.

But interestingly, DG's booklet gave the recording date only as: 1976-10-21 and 1977-01-27.

It certainly does not mean that only takes made on these 2 days were used in the final product, because, e.g. the chorus and the soloists were not recorded on those 2 days. Record companies are often more causal about recording data than we may expect.

 

[Becca]

...and, of course, there is one other factor to be considered, particularly with later HvK ... egomania

 

[Merl]

Another strange thing is that whilst looking at the Karajan fur Alle site there are multiple recordings of symphonies 5 and 6 for example and some are radio recordings from the day earlier than the cycle recordings. Perhaps the dvd performances are culled from those? The 7th is proving very intriguing and is almost certainly not the 80s cycle release as times are very different. The booklet from the cycle gives the 7th recording date as Dec 1983 and visiting the site here's all the 7ths recorded that year.


Symphonie Nr.7
Ludwig van Beethoven
Berliner Philharmoniker
31.01.1983
RADIO

Symphonie Nr. 7 A-Dur op. 92
Ludwig van Beethoven
Berliner Philharmoniker
03.12.1983
RADIO

Symphonie Nr. 7 in A -Dur, op. 92
Ludwig van Beethoven
Berliner Philharmoniker
05.12.1983
STUDIO

Symphonie Nr. 7
Ludwig van Beethoven
Berliner Philharmoniker
06.12.1983
FILM

Notice how the studio and film recordings are a day in-between. If they were used for both then surely it would just say studio and film and the same date would be given? The studio and film recordings of the 4th are similarly given as a day apart and far enough out in 2 movements to suspect that these could be different recordings (both outer movements are 9 and 7 seconds different respectively). My brain hurts.... 🤯

 

[Kiki]

Robert, the 'miming' was done for artistic effect on the video. If these performances were made up of sectional clips of recording surely either myself or Kiki would have noticed the editing but listening to a few of these recordings they don't sound sectional or piecemeal - they'd be slightly disjointed and none of these performances sound like that. It's hard cos Karajan's vision of the the Beethoven cycle varied little especially in the 70s and 80s and so timings for performances are pretty close (the guy was a walking metronome). The BPO knew these works like the back of their hand, knew how Karajan liked them being played, had just recorded them for a cycle and were playing them on tour so in theory they could easily have just knocked out another recording. By the way who is the producer /engineer on the Sony Dvd, Kiki? Are they different from the ones on the cycle (Breest / Glotz)? Here's a shot of the production notes from the original 80s cycle (not the Karajan Gold remasters) if it helps with your detective work. Recording dates are included.
PS. I've read all the Karajan books and scoured the Karajan fan sites and no-one actually knows the answer to this question so if we do get to the bottom of this mystery it will be a first. To boldly go where no man has gone before......

The booklet of DG's original LP box is the same as yours. It stated this recording team:
Executive Producer: Günther Breest
Recording Producer: Michel Glotz
Balance Engineer: Günter Hermans
Editing: Reinhild Schmidt

Note that it also stated:
Recording of Symphonies nos. 5 & 6: TELEMONDIAL S.A.M.
(Post-recording Work: Engineer: Günter Hermans · Editing: Reinhild Schmidt)

Now, a surprise! The booklet of the "Karajan 1980s" box stated the same team except the editor for Nos. 5 & 6:
Editing: Ludger Böckenhoff

(Open image in another tab to see a full size jpeg.)

Before we get to the Sony, let's be clear that DG is not being consistent with the credits. However, there is obviously something different going on with Nos. 5 & 6 but I do not know what. Yet.

Here is the team that Sony stated:

(Open image in another tab to see a full size jpeg.)

Two persons were credited as Recording Engineer. Günter Hermans from the DG team, and Wolfgang Gülich.

Not surprised there are two names because Sony allegedly re-played the DG recordings and re-recorded them presumably by another engineer.

Alright, I don't think Sony's credit list tells me much. Thoughts?

 

[Merl]

Oh god, this is getting complicated. Wolfgang Gülich is Herbie's old EMI engineer. Strangely he's credited on other releases of the Sony dvd release below. Check out the recording dates at bottom, btw!

Ludwig van Beethoven, Herbert von Karajan, Berliner Philharmoniker - Ludwig Van Beethoven: Symphonies Nos. 6 "Pastoral" & 7

View credits, reviews, tracks and shop for the 2000 DVD release of "Ludwig Van Beethoven: Symphonies Nos. 6 "Pastoral" & 7" on Discogs.

www.discogs.com

 

[Kiki]

Another strange thing is that whilst looking at the Karajan fur Alle site there are multiple recordings of symphonies 5 and 6 for example and some are radio recordings from the day earlier than the cycle recordings. Perhaps the dvd performances are culled from those? The 7th is proving very intriguing and is almost certainly not the 80s cycle release as times are very different. The booklet from the cycle gives the 7th recording date as Dec 1983 and visiting the site here's all the 7ths recorded that year.


Symphonie Nr.7
Ludwig van Beethoven
Berliner Philharmoniker
31.01.1983
RADIO

Symphonie Nr. 7 A-Dur op. 92
Ludwig van Beethoven
Berliner Philharmoniker
03.12.1983
RADIO

Symphonie Nr. 7 in A -Dur, op. 92
Ludwig van Beethoven
Berliner Philharmoniker
05.12.1983
STUDIO

Symphonie Nr. 7
Ludwig van Beethoven
Berliner Philharmoniker
06.12.1983
FILM

Notice how the studio and film recordings are a day in-between. If they were used for both then surely it would just say studio and film and the same date would be given? The studio and film recordings of the 4th are similarly given as a day apart and far enough out in 2 movements to suspect that these could be different recordings (both outer movements are 9 and 7 seconds different respectively). My brain hurts.... 🤯

In fact, I was having a very bad headache during the last couple of days while I was investigating #1. I was so worried that I had to take an antigen test. Luckily the result was negative. So it must be Karajan who gave me the headache!

OK, seriously, comparing the Sony and DG 1982-84 cycle, so far we know:

#1 is very likely an alternative take of the cycle's #1.

#9 is certainly the 1986, not part of the cycle.

#5 & #6 are suspicious because of a different editor.

#4 & #8 are also suspicious. #4 is very likely a different one.

#7 has to be a different one.

... to be continued.

Oh god, this is getting complicated. Wolfgang Gülich is Herbie's old EMI engineer. Strangely he's credited on other releases of the Sony dvd release below. Check out the recording dates at bottom, btw!

Ludwig van Beethoven, Herbert von Karajan, Berliner Philharmoniker - Ludwig Van Beethoven: Symphonies Nos. 6 "Pastoral" & 7

View credits, reviews, tracks and shop for the 2000 DVD release of "Ludwig Van Beethoven: Symphonies Nos. 6 "Pastoral" & 7" on Discogs.

www.discogs.com

Lovely!

 

[Merl]

One of the things that is confusing me is the inclusion of Gulich and Bockenhoff on the credits. Gulich worked almost exclusively for EMI so although he worked with Breest, in engineering some of Breest's BPO recordings for EMI, that all stopped in the late 70s (although Karajan still had a contract running for limited releases for EMI but these weren't with the BPO but the VPO). By the 80s any new recordings featuring the Karajan/BPO combo were exclusive to DG, AFAIK, so I'm really confused why Gulich is involved and why he's only credited as engineer on the last movement of the 6th symphony (I found this out when I was scouring thru discogs). Bockenhoff's inclusion, Glotz's crediting and the the exclusion of Breest's name from the credits (he would have to have been credited if these were the 80s recordings) is even more confusing so all I can assume is these recordings are different and have nothing to do with the original cycle. The fact that Glotz was the the producer on the 77 cycle also implies that these recordings were from earlier in Karajan's career (but the times suggest they were later). All so confusing!
I'll have a good skip-listen tomorrow and see what aurally I can work out.

 

[Merl]

Firstly apologies for the double post. What's making this very difficult is that there are differences between the original 80s cycle and the Karajan Gold remaster, especially in balance (I have both). I've also noticed a couple of definite edits that have been repaired from the original cd release . Soundwise the original cds were quite harsh on the brass, glassy and full of some very odd mixes (background instruments would artificially increase in volume as if boosted on recording desk (stay off those sliders Gunther). That was all fixed in the remastered Gold set, which sounds way better than I remembered. As far as the DVD is concerned the sound is slightly more bassy, blended and restrained. OK, so to what I've listened to up to now....

Symphony 1 - as Kiki has already said this is a definite alternative take of the outer movements but, apart from the mix, the inner movements are indistinguishable.
Symphony 2 - this is a tough one. It doesn't quite match up in bits but I'm suspecting this has had a lot of serious remastering and the first two movements sound very similar. The 3rd movement, however, has some minor differences and this may well be a different take. I found little difference in the final movement.
Symphony 3 - I'm convinced that this is the same performance from the cycle just mixed differently.
Symphony 4 - this one all sounds remarkably similar except the final movement, which does not seem to match up at all (it feels busier, brighter and better on the cycle too).
Symphonies 5&6 - again, apart from the mix I can hear little difference apart from the last movement of the 5th but I suspect these may be tiny changes from the remastering and listening to the original discs it's definitely looking like these are the same.
Symphony 7 - as was expected this is a slightly different version (it's not as good as the cycle) but the opening movenent is identical. Both inner movements are similar but have slight differences but the final movement sounds quite different.
Symphony 8 - the first three movements sound the same but there are differences in the final movement that make me think this is a better played and superior sounding take on the cd. It has more vitality.
Symphony 9 - we already know this is not from the cycle but is from the 1986 release.

So apart from discovering that the sound mix on the dvd, original cds and remastered Karajan Gold cds is very different what else have we discovered? We know that a few different takes are evident in some movements but the bulk is the 85 set and the 9th is different and from 86. I'm Karajanned and Beethovened out. Most timings don't exactly match and this is often due to silences before and after movements (+/- 5 or 6 seconds is a reasonable adjustment). So is this a 7th Karajan cycle? Well not really and it was produced by Glotz and not Breest. Back to you, Kiki! 😎

 

[bagpipers]

I have the Von Karajan cycle but not sure if it's the Berliner or Wiener Philharmoniker ,I'd have to run out to the car and check and I'm not doing that over this matter right now.
It's really good though,it's not my absolute favorite but it's pretty good.

 

[Merl]

OK, some historic perspectives of the time. Part of the problem with the 80s cycle and the dvd recording is its largely skipped over in the Karajan books as there was so much other very important stuff going on. Firstly Karajan was not well, still struggling with crippling back pain and having had major surgery, yet he had a full itinerary for the years 82-85. He was also in the midst of a huge and life-changing dispute with the BPO after the Sabine Mayer affair. Tensions were huge, legal disputes were rife and he and the BPO hardly spoke. Osborne is sketchy here but we know that Breest was busy remixing the 80s cycle and many of Karajan's other recordings so that occupied him for the best part of winter 83 to February 85. We know from letters that the Beethoven cycle was finally mixed completely (but still not to Karajan's liking) by September 85 as DG were pressing for completion and Karajan had other pressing problems (see above) and had lost patience with Breest, Glotz and the whole process. Osborne says that the Telemondial filming of the Beethoven took part from December 1983 to at least the end of January 84 and was very intensive. Other small sections were filmed in February but the film was not complete and the BPO were refusing to finish it. Perhaps the film featured Karajan so much because they had sections to fill where they could not get the BPO in to film. Who knows?

Edit: I've just read a footnote by Osborne that says the recordings of the cds and the dvds are one of the same. As we know, that's not totally true but I'm gathering that what I said earlier about it being mainly the 85 set with a few alt takes and the '86 9th is sounding more like the real story. I' ve also just read an interview with Glotz where he said he took control of the music for the film as Breest was busy on other cd projects.

 

[Kiki]

I have looked into #3.

Thought it would be easy, but alas, the Sony and the DG 1984 (from the 82-84 cycle) are not the same.

Again, conclusion first: The Sony and the DG 1984 are possibly different takes from the same recording sessions that took place from 1984-01-23 to 31. (The is the same period when Karajan also recorded other symphonies for the 82-84 cycle.)

Timing comparison:

Again, all silences deducted, error range +/-1s giving a comparison granularity of around 2s.

The timings of the Sony and the DG 1984 are similar, except that the DG is significantly slower in the finale.
Sony: 13:58, 16:04, 6:09, 12:04
DG 1984: 13:59, 16:01, 6:07, 12:13

Spectrograms and listening:

First, I should elaborate one thing that I did not before: I use Spectrograms of both recordings to compare one thing only, and that is when every passage starts and ends. If they are the same recording, the "edges" in the spectrograms should coincide exactly. On the other hand, I do not worry about amplitude or frequency range. They are bound to look different on the spectrograms because they are different mixes.

The Sony and the DG 1984 sound the same when listening to them separately. However, the spectrograms show that they are subtly different. The tempo fluctuation seen throughout the whole piece implies that they are different takes.

Mvt 1: The spectrograms look almost the same, except the last 1/4 of the mvt where the DG slows down by around 2s. Playing them simultaneously, the music tends to sync, go out-of-sync, then sync again repeatedly while in the last 1/4 the DG goes significantly slower.

Mvt 2: The spectrograms look almost the same, but when the beginning is synchronised, it is easy to tell that, the DG keeps slowing down to as much as 4s, but towards the end it catches up and finishes around 2s faster overall.

Mvt 3: The spectrograms look almost the same until the last 2 mins when the DG speeds up and finishes 2s faster.

Mvt 4: In the first 1/2, up to around variation 9 where the music turns tranquil, the spectrograms look the same but in fact, the difference in tempo is not consistent and it fluctuates within 1s. In the second 1/2 the DG slows down significantly to account for almost all of the 9s difference seen in the timing difference in the whole mvt.

Let me emphasise one thing - I do not believe the differences seen here could be due to inherent granularity errors of Audacity, because when I was comparing #9 from Sony and DG, the timing edges occurred at exactly the same places, and the Sony and the DG also synchronised perfectly when I played them simultaneously.

Spoiler: Here are the spectrograms if you want to look at them.

In these screen captures, Sony's spectrogram is put at the top, DG 1984 at the bottom.

Each jpeg is about 2MB in size.

Beethoven Symphony No. 3 comparison - Mvt 1 - Sony v DG 1984
Beethoven Symphony No. 3 comparison - Mvt 2 - Sony v DG 1984
Beethoven Symphony No. 3 comparison - Mvt 3 - Sony v DG 1984
Beethoven Symphony No. 3 comparison - Mvt 4 - Sony v DG 1984

Recording date:

This Sony "Re-recorded" release stated 1984-01 & 02, so did earlier Sony releases from their "His Legacy for Home Video" series.

DG in both the original LP box and the "Karajan 1980s" box stated 1984-01. DG did not state February.

The most detailed date I could find is from tower.jp: 1984-01-23 to 31. This is probably when the recording sessions were held.

discoverkarajan.com stated 1984-01-31 for the Sony and 1984-01-29 for the DG. While discoverkarajan.com's single-day dates are questionable, it stating two different dates for the Sony and the DG suggests there is a possibility that the Sony and the DG are not the same recording.

Note that Sony also stated February, which no other sources stated. Perhaps there were really recording sessions in February that DG did not care to tell us. Or, perhaps Sony was simply being casual because DG has coupled the Jan #3 and Feb #8 on the same CD in the past and stated generally Jan & Feb 1984 for both works. But these are only speculations.

From my experience, the recording dates stated by record companies big or small are often casual (in fact I think unprofessional from a data management point of view). The funny thing is that, DG's releases in Japan, for example, often state more detailed dates than in their global releases. I can only imagine the reason being them submitting to consumer pressure there. Yet, they still don't want to give the rest of us the same kind of details and accuracy.

Therefore, I will ignore the February stated by Sony. They are not credible. Just like DG. Just like most other record companies.

Conclusion: The Sony and the DG 1984 are possibly different takes from the same recording sessions that took place from 1984-01-23 to 31.

 

[Merl]

That Eroica was the recording I thought that sounded the same on both versions so its interesting that you say they're different. If that's the case on the closest recording I could find then it's safe to say the rest is definitely going to be all different. This has been one helluva detective case, Kiki. Lol

 

[Kiki]

That Eroica was the recording I thought that sounded the same on both versions so its interesting that you say they're different. If that's the case on the closest recording I could find then it's safe to say the rest is definitely going to be all different. This has been one helluva detective case, Kiki. Lol

The detective work continues... but it seems to be falling in to a pattern now - slightly different takes from the 82-84 sessions were used by Sony as the soundtrack; except #9 of course which is exactly the never-released DG 1986.

Some of these takes are not discernible by ear, at least for ordinary listeners like you and me. I wouldn't know their timing signatures were different if I didn't scrutinise them in Audacity.

I do wonder why Sony used these alternative takes. Any speculation? Glotz coming on board exerting his influence? Complicated legal/licensing/copyright issues? Wolfgang Gülich's involvement in #5/6 for the DG cycle is also fascinating.

By the way...

There's another Karajan Beethoven DVD cycle "produced" in the late 60s/early 70s with a similar kind of glamorous lighting. It was released by DG/Unitel. Did Richard Osborne say anything about that in his book? Did it use the DG 61-62 cycle as its soundtrack? (But that #9 has a different cast from the DG 62! Déjà vu!)

 

[Merl]

The detective work continues... but it seems to be falling in to a pattern now - slightly different takes from the 82-84 sessions were used by Sony as the soundtrack; except #9 of course which is exactly the never-released DG 1986.

Some of these takes are not discernible by ear, at least for ordinary listeners like you and me. I wouldn't know their timing signatures were different if I didn't scrutinise them in Audacity.

I do wonder why Sony used these alternative takes. Any speculation? Glotz coming on board exerting his influence? Complicated legal/licensing/copyright issues? Wolfgang Gülich's involvement in #5/6 for the DG cycle is also fascinating.

By the way...

There's another Karajan Beethoven DVD cycle "produced" in the late 60s/early 70s with a similar kind of glamorous lighting. It was released by DG/Unitel. Did Richard Osborne say anything about that in his book? Did it use the DG 61-62 cycle as its soundtrack? (But that #9 has a different cast from the DG 62! Déjà vu!)

Here we go again, lol. I'd always assumed the Unitel 70s set was mimed due to the posed shots of musicians in a line, etc, but now I'm starting to wonder. I'll have a scan through the Osborne in a minute but I dont recall him going into much detail about it. I'll be back!

Edit: there is discussion about the Unitel cycle in the link below. It still doesn't really answer the question. Btw, there is little in the book about the Unitel set. I know the videos were mostly recorded from 1971-72 and finally completed in 1973 (4th) except the 9th which is from 1968 and from what I've read is almost certainly a different 'live' version than the 63 set. You've got to ask yourself why Karajan would use recordings from almost 10 years earlier when the BPO performed all the Beethoven symphonies (bar the 9th) several times a year in concert and for radio performances. Timings will be important here as in the 70s Karajan's Beethoven (generally) speeded up, a little, for a time.

https://hvk1955.proboards.com/thread/183/karajan-concert-dg-dvd?page=1

 

[Merl]

Btw, I've been watching lots of interviews with former BPO members. One of them was recalling the early 70s and discussing the first filming sessions. He said that sessions for filming (70s and 80s) were similar in that 'we recorded the symphonies first and then mimed back to the recordings". If this is, in fact, the case, were these the recordings used in the soundtrack? If so we're looking at cycles 7 and 8. The plot thickens!

Edit: This is getting silly, as I've just read something that may be contradictory in an interview with the cameramen who worked on the 70s set who said,
"The members of the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra were set up in novel arrangements and played sections of each piece along with a pre-recorded track as they were filmed from a variety of angles under special lighting. Karajan had a very clear idea of what the films should look like, and combining backlit close-ups of individual players and sections with larger groups and sequences of himself conducting.... "

By pre-recorded" do they mean recorded just before the video shoot or from an existing performance? Good grief!

 

[Kiki]

Interesting info. Thanks, Merl! It might well be an 8th cycle!

Alright, I apologize. I am a troublemaker. I should not have mentioned it at all. Not now.

I will finish comparing the Sony and the DG 82-84 cycle in Audacity first. We have probably guessed correctly what it is (cycle no. 7, a close cousin of the 82-84 cycle), so motivation for me is dropping, but I need to document the proof to finish it off, bar any unlikely surprise.

 

[Becca]

Btw, I've been watching lots of interviews with former BPO members. One of them was recalling the early 70s and discussing the first filming sessions. He said that sessions for filming (70s and 80s) were similar in that 'we recorded the symphonies first and then mimed back to the recordings". If this is, in fact, the case, were these the recordings used in the soundtrack? If so we're looking at cycles 7 and 8. The plot thickens!

Edit: This is getting silly, as I've just read something that may be contradictory in an interview with the cameramen who worked on the 70s set who said,
"The members of the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra were set up in novel arrangements and played sections of each piece along with a pre-recorded track as they were filmed from a variety of angles under special lighting. Karajan had a very clear idea of what the films should look like, and combining backlit close-ups of individual players and sections with larger groups and sequences of himself conducting.... "

By pre-recorded" do they mean recorded just before the video shoot or from an existing performance? Good grief!

That edit goes along with what Simon Rattle says in the video on the Digital Concert Hall site.

 

[Kiki]

I have looked into the rest: #2,4,5,6,7,8.

Conclusion first: The Sony and the DG 1982-84 are different recordings.

Spectrograms:

The spectrograms of the Sony and the DG 1982-84 cycle are all different, although some of them are so similar that trying to distinguish them by ears would be near-impossible, especially since they are all different mixes.

#2: Visually very different between the Sony and the DG 1984.

#4: Movts 1,2,4 are visually different. Mvt 3 is almost the same, the first half is virtually the same, but in the second half the DG 1983 slows down, at the end by just under 1s.

#5: Movts 1,2,3 are visually different. Mvt 4 is almost the same, fluctuation in tempo varies in the range of 100-250ms. Sometimes the Sony is faster, sometimes the DG 1982 is faster.

#6: Very similar throughout, but upon closer examination, the DG 1982 is slightly faster, except in Mvt 2 where it is slightly slower.

#7: Visually very different.

#8: Visually very different.

The Sony vs DG spectrograms can be downloaded from here (zipped, 76MB). #1 - #8 are included. No #9 because it is obviously the DG 1986 so comparison is pointless.

Recording dates:

There are discrepancies between Sony and DG, but that's expected of them. I will take tower.jp's dates. They are the most specific and the most credible as I have explained before.

discoverkarajan.com is down at the moment so I cannot verify. However, it has generally stated different dates for the Sony and the DG, except #6 where it stated the same date but that still does not mean the Sony #6 and DG #6 are the same. As I explained before, the fact that discoverkarajan.com always states a single-day date for a recording is very suspicious making it not credible.

#2:
DG stated 1984-01 ("Karajan 1980s" box) and 1984-02 (original LP box).
Sony stated 1984-01 & 02.
tower.jp stated 1984-02-18 to 24.

#4:
DG stated 1983-12.
Sony stated 1982-12.
Sony also stated 1982-11-18 to 21 & 1983-11-29 to 12-06 in their "His Legacy for Home Video" series. (Sony stated these dates for both #4 & 5.)
tower.jp stated 1983-11-29 to 12-06.

#5:
DG stated 1982-11.
Sony stated 1983-09 & 12.
Sony also stated 1982-11-18 to 21 & 1983-11-29 to 12-06 in their "His Legacy for Home Video" series. (Sony stated these dates for both #4 & 5.)
tower.jp stated 1982-11-18 to 21.

#6:
DG stated 1982-11.
Sony stated 1982-11.
tower.jp stated 1982-11-18 to 21.

#7:
DG stated 1983-12.
Sony stated 1982-11.
tower.jp stated 1983-11-29 to 12-06.

#8:
DG stated 1984-02.
Sony stated 1984-01 & 02.
tower.jp stated 1984-02-18 to 24.

x x x x x x x x

That's it!

Final Conclusion:

The Sony DVD cycle includes recordings that are different from the DG 1982-84 cycle.

Although the Sony was probably recorded at roughly the same time as the DG cycle, except #9, which is exactly the never-released DG 1986, which is not part of the DG cycle.

I am convinced that the Sony is a genuine 7th cycle, and it is a close cousin of the DG 1982-84 cycle.

A few supplementary words on the Sony DVD cycle:

In this Sony "re-recorded" cycle, Sony have employed some really aggressive fade-in and fade-out. In some symphonies, a whole second is chopped off at the beginning or at the end of a movement.

The edges and the frequencies in the Sony spectrograms also look overly smudged relative to the DG. That means the dynamic changes are less sharp and the notes sound more reverberant. This could be the result of it being "re-recorded".

What next:

The DG/Unitel DVD cycle "produced" in the late 60s/early 70s, anyone?

The info Merl posted suggests it could well be an 8th cycle.

But that's for another day.