I prefer the 1963. From what I have heard of the 1985 it is rather awful - sound, covers & the general concept, whereas 1963 and 1977 are both good; I own both and once also had the Philharmonia issue - which was a bit anonymous and in mono.

 

The 1984/85 cycle gets a bad rap. The initial recordings were harsh sounding but the remastered Karajan Gold is in very good sound with a fullness that the earlier recordings lack. The Eroica may be his best ever, but I feel this 9th may be Karajan's weakest. I listen to the 63 for the passionate performances, but the 80s cycle should not be missed.

 

I doubt anyone here has ever listened to all three comprehensively. The poor reviews of the latter two cycles and the grim reputation of the 80s Karajan scares most people away.

 

Poor reviews of 1963 and 1977? Just what have you been reading?

 

I don't have any Karajan's Beethoven ... but his late 70s and early 80s Sibelius is very good.

 

I generally feel that Karajan was quite consistant (others might say static) in his interpretations. To me, his Beethoven did not change much over the years. I find that all three of his DG cycles are stellar. His 80s cycle might sound a little less harsh and dramatic and more fine-tuned and balanced. But to me, the most significant differences are those of recording/sound quality. The 60s cycle has a certain roughness to it, due to a less sophisticated recording technique, which is quite charming.

 

I have both cycles -'63 & '77 and the '63 is the one I love the most. The ninth of the '63 is just outstanding.

 

I suppose that's my second favorite ninth (behind Furtwängler/Bayreuth).

I can speak with some confidence on the 62-63 & the 77 set. The 77 set is not as bad as some make it out to be... but I still think the early-60s is the one to beat.

My favorite 7th is from that set. [Kleiber fans will disagree.] As a rendition, if you're one of those who hyperventilate about omitting one of the exposition-repeats from Movement Three (I'm not), then you'll disqualify the Karajan 7th. I believe you'd miss out... but that's just one fan's opinion...

 

The Eroica in the later digital version is better than the Eroica in 62.

 

I'd buy the '60s cycle, mainly because I already have the one from the 70s. But I'm pretty happy with it, so I'm not looking to add to it.

 

1963, and if money isn't a problem, get the hybrid set for improved sound (stereo layer).

This can be supplemented with three fine remasterings from the 1977 cycle. I underappreciated the '77 "Pastoral", until I heard it in this particular reissue.

View attachment 8286 View attachment 8287

 

If you're going to supplement a Pastoral, I'd jump ship from Karajan to Bohm.

 

What about his 50s mono perfs with the Philharmonia - they are the best. Good pacing - electrifying playing.

 

I used to have the 1977 set on vinyl. It is a really outstanding set with some superb performances. I now have the 1963 recordings which are equally fine. It will be roundabouts and swings for personal preference. I also have the 1985 Eroica. It has a superb funeral march. No set of Beethoven symphonies is completely successful all the way through. But HvK comes as near as we perhaps are likely to see. Of course there are finer performances of individual symphonies if you look hard (eg Kleiber's outstanding 5&7, but Karajan nowhere lets the side (or Beethoven) down.

 

The 1963 cycle is a must have for anyone who likes Beethoven or anyone who wants to explore what Classical/Romantic music is about. Outstanding interpretation by Karajan and finest performance of the 3 cycles.
Maybe I'm biased, but it was my first purchase after I realized I had outgrown rock music.

 

Slightly biased you might say and I would not wish to have any of the Karajan versions thanks all the same.

 

None, because his recordings are not historically informed.

 

Question.... Is this the remaster of the 1977 cycle? thanks.

 

It's the 1977 cycle. An Amazon review says that it's a 2007 remaster, but I can't see mention of that on the (somewhat blurry) images of the front or back.

 

Ken, I saw the same Amazon review and there are 2 diff covers of the 1997, neither says remastered which is supposed to have better sound.
But, I'm betting that discogs is correct in that they say it is the remastered version.
http://www.discogs.com/Karajan-Beethoven-Berliner-Philharmoniker-The-Symphonies/release/2674825

Just trying to buy the right box set. thanks.

 

Well, it's listed by Amazon as a 2008 release, that's a good sign. Though frankly I doubt there was much wrong with the sound of the original release. I have far older DGG releases (Fournier/Gulda's Beethoven cello sonatas for instance) with superlative sound, not needing any remastering.

 

You're probably right. 1970s DG sound was very good on cd. Their late 1950s and 60s LPs are also excellent.

 

I picked '63, as it is the one I spent my time listening to most. I've gotten great mileage out of that set.

 

The only of the digital I know inside and out is the 9th. The upper register male singer was a 'no no' for many. It was a plus for me, considering it was my first 9th, and therefore the most impressionable. I have a theory about impressions, and people who will stop at nothing in an analytical defense of what is quite simply, a very impactful impression, I'll drop it there.

Surely the 63 has been most praised.

 

The mono EMI set with the Philharmonia is excellent too. The most recent remastering has good sound.

 

Well just to be awkward....I like the Eroica from the 63, the 'In your face!' 5th from the '77 and the performance if not the cd quality of the Pastorale from the 85.

 

I have the '63 set on SACD--the remastering makes them sound less harsh and more detailed. The performances are top notch--taut, precise, and very emotional.

 

I like the EMI Karajan Beethoven symphonies, but the sound quality probably isn't up to the standards of exacting teenagers.

 

What about the video cycles he did for DG and Sony?

 

I wouldn't purchase any of the Karajan sets because they were not performed on period instruments with historically informed performance practices.

 

I seldom buy recordings like this unless they use re-animated players of the time. And the conductor too, of course.

 

I recommend the 1963 Cycle, the 1977 is not bad at all, but it is too closely mic'd and it's a bit too "in your face".

The 1963 9th symphony is my personal definitive recording, I own over 12 different 9th recordings trying to find one that would possibly supplant Karajan's as my favorite but there is just something magical about the intensity and forward drive in Karajan's, not to mention the excellent phrasing. Some other 9ths sound dead by comparison after listening to Karajan's. I've slowly come to realize that I'm not gonna find another definitive 9th. The tempos are almost perfect in my opinion, it's not HIP-fast and it's not Furtwangler-slow, the 1st movement comes in at a nice 15:33, the 2nd movement is almost demonic in its energy and thrust. The 3rd movement at 16:28 could stand to be just a tad slower, but it's not a big gripe. The final movement is amazing despite the chorus being a bit muffled.

My main issues with Karajan's 1963 9th are: The timpani in the 2nd movement are muffled/dulled, the Adagio Cantabile 3rd movement could be just a little slower, and the chorus is a bit muffled compared to the orchestra. Other than those minor quibbles, it's an amazing 9th. I've never heard another one like it. For the most part, the problems I have are merely technical/recording issues, and not performance issues.

For the other symphonies, Karajan's 1963 cycle has a superb 3rd, 5th, and 7th. I still say Kleiber's 5th and 7th are my favorites, but Karajan's 5th and 7th are very very close. In fact, I would say that Karajan's 5th is tied for my favorite with Kleiber. I think Karajan got it right by not adding the repeat in the finale like Kleiber did, there is too much of a good thing sometimes!

The 4th, 8th are also very good but not on the level of the 3, 5, 7, 9. The 1st and 2nd are also done very well. I would echo what seems to be the consensus, the only real weak-link in Karajan's 1963 cycle is the 6th "Pastoral". No conductor ever has done a perfect cycle, it's impossible in my opinion. Any cycle has to be supplemented with other individual symphony recordings. That said, Karajan 1963 came closer than anyone has.