Schumann's Orchestral Works

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 9:08 am

Hello all,

I know there are many Robert Schumann fans here amongst us, but rarely do I see his name pop up in our discussions (perhaps I'm not reading things closely enough

). I thought I would create a thread where we could discuss our favourite recordings of his orchestral works, which seem to draw more controversy than his chamber and solo piano works.

I feel that Schumann left his symphonies open to interpretation, especially with concern to dynamics and texture. I was ecstatic to find at a used record store in Halifax this past weekend Daniel Barenboim's highly-praised set of his complete Symphonies with the Staatskapelle Berlin for only twelve dollars! "Why would someone trade in this record?!" I thought to myself. I'd heard the Rhenish from this set on the radio before and was impressed at the time. However, after having listened through the album a couple of times, I've decided that the performance is a touch too bombastic for my tastes. I prefer the landler second movement to be taken a bit more apace, but Barenboim plays around with the tempi to create a more Romantic feel to the symphony. He also manipulates the textures in an interesting way, most noticeably in the scherzo of the Second Symphony. In the adagio of the same work, he achieves a strange balance between the first and second violins that is a bit off-putting.

Where Barenboim's dynamic and textural extremes work well is in his performance of the Fourth Symphony, and especially in the Scherzo/Finale. I do wish he would have adhered to the 'attacca' command a bit more strictly, but this is only a minor issue.

Until now, I have been subsisting on Bernstein's and Von Dohnani's accounts of Schumann's symphonies, and Dohnani's recording with the Cleveland Orchestra on Decca remains my favourite -- a very balanced, Classical approach to the Second and Third symphonies (which, after all, is what Schumann was trying to achieve and is sometimes evident in his orchestration).

As for Schumann's concertos, I have always been fond of Leif Ove Andsnes/Marriss Jansons' take on the Piano Concerto (along with the Grieg Concerto), and I am fond of Mischa Maisky's version of the Cello Concerto. While I have heard the Violin Concerto a few times, I don't yet have a recording of this somewhat disjointed work, but the story behind the work intrigues me. Could someone recommend me a recording of this not often-heard Schumann piece?

What are your favourite recordings of Schumann's works for orchestra? What do you look for in his symphonies, concertos, overtures, and the like?

- Ken

slofstra · Post by **slofstra** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 9:20 am

Many, many years ago I purchased a small box containing Haitink's versions of the Schumann symphonies. I have played them many, many times and have never felt the need to go roamin in the gloamin for anything else. They are so smooth, which might be more a characteristic of Schumann than of Haitink.

[piano comments removed]

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 9:25 am

Heh, I didn't intend to include his solo piano stuff in my survey, but I appreciate your recommendations! I'm a bigger fan of his orchestral work, perhaps because I can listen and envision him going back and editing things in the 1850s when he was the kapellmeister at Dusseldorf in order to make them more "symphonic" and less "pianistic".

karlhenning · Post by **karlhenning** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 9:51 am

Hi Ken,

I have David Zinman and the Zurich Tonhalle in the four symphonies; also the Third and Fourth Symphonies by Günter Wand with the NDR Symphony. I like them about equally well.

I've got the Cello Concerto, both as Schumann wrote it played by Du Pre with Barenboim and the New Philharmonia, and in Shostakovich's re-orchestration, played by Ivashkin with the Russian State Symphony and Valery Polyansky. I like both, but perhaps I enjoy the latter a bit more, not that I have any quarrel with Schumann's orchestration (I don't) but because I do enjoy the Schumann-Meets-Shostakovich dimension

Cheers,
~Karl

Barry · Post by **Barry** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 10:14 am

I came to Schumann's symphonies relatively late, but once they clicked, I listened to them to death.

I've compared a bunch of recordings and have three favorite cycles:

Sawallisch/Dresden
Barenboim/Berlin Staatskapelle
Bernstein/VPO

To show where my taste runs, my least favorite among the cycles I've heard is the classic Szell set.

I've got no problem with dense orchestral textures and love the blended sound that especially Sawallisch and Barenboim get from their orchestras.

One exception for me is the Zinman/Zurich set, which is a nice fresh sounding alternative to what I usually prefer.

RebLem · Post by **RebLem** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 11:10 am

Barry Z wrote:I came to Schumann's symphonies relatively late, but once they clicked, I listened to them to death.

I've compared a bunch of recordings and have three favorite cycles:

Sawallisch/Dresden
Barenboim/Berlin Staatskapelle
Bernstein/VPO

To show where my taste runs, my least favorite among the cycles I've heard is the classic Szell set.

I've got no problem with dense orchestral textures and love the blended sound that especially Sawallisch and Barenboim get from their orchestras.

One exception for me is the Zinman/Zurich set, which is a nice fresh sounding alternative to what I usually prefer.

For the Piano Concerto, I prefer the Samson Francois recording with Paul Kletzki and the Paris Conservatory Orch. I bought the Isserlis recording of the Cello Concerto on Corlyss's recommendation, but I haven't listened to it yet. There is a wonderful two CD set on Music and Arts which contains my favorite performances of the Syms 1 & 4 conducted by Hermann Abendroth, but the greatest 4th ever recorded, I think, was the Klemperer, which, however, appears to be OOP. For the others, the Szell and both Bernsteins (Sony and DGG) are excellent, as is the Kubelik and the Zinman. I should probably get the Giulini LAPO 3rd; I attended a CSO concert once where he conducted it, and it was an excellent performance. The truth is, though, that with regard to the symphonies, we have an embarrassment of riches. It is the chamber music choices that are a bit thin. I wish Philips would reissue the Quartetto Italiano recordings of the string quartets that in the LP era were coupled with the Brahms quartets. The latter are available on CD, but the Schumanns are not, for some goofy reason. And, this morning, I sort of did some "window shopping" at Crotchet, and was amazed to find that there are a number of sets of the complete piano music available in Europe that are not available in the US.

Barry · Post by **Barry** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 11:43 am

For greatest fourth ever, and maybe my single favorite Schumann symphony recording, I love the Furtwangler on DG.
His transition from the third to fourth movement is one of those great mystical Furtwangler moments.

Chalkperson · Post by **Chalkperson** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 11:44 am

For the Piano Concerto...Christan Zacharias on MDG
For the Cello Concerto...Anne Gastinel on Naive

Symrphonies 2+4...Chailly with the Gewandhaus Orchestra
and also Thomas Dausgaard with the Sweedish Chamber Orchestra

For all four Symphonies...Zinman and the Zurich Tonhalle

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 1:22 pm

There seems to be a lot of affirmatives on Zinman and the Tonhalle's Symphonies set, which I recall was reviewed alongside Barenboim's in Gramophone when they were released. I've heard the Amazon extracts for the Tonhalle set and it seems to suit my tastes in Schumann more than Barenboim's (i.e., balance over bombast), so it might be worth getting if I see it cheaply.

What do you folks think of the Mahler "editions" of the Schumann symphonies?

Chalkperson · Post by **Chalkperson** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 1:35 pm

keninottawa wrote:There seems to be a lot of affirmatives on Zinman and the Tonhalle's Symphonies set, which I recall was reviewed alongside Barenboim's in Gramophone when they were released. I've heard the Amazon extracts for the Tonhalle set and it seems to suit my tastes in Schumann more than Barenboim's (i.e., balance over bombast), so it might be worth getting if I see it cheaply.

What do you folks think of the Mahler "editions" of the Schumann symphonies?

Zinman is a very reliable conductor, although his recent Mahler 1+2 discs are not as good as the best readings...I listed two versions of 2+4 because the Chailly disc uses the Mahler Edition and the Dausgaard the 1841 version...

Heck148 · Post by **Heck148** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 5:50 pm

Schumann symphonies have been recorded often, by many great conductors...

I don't have a favorite set tho - Barenboim/CSO [alot better than the later Berlin one], Bernstein's NYPO, and Szell/CO are pretty tough to beat...

for individual performances:
#1 - Barenboim/CSO - this one is great, builds up tremendous excitement in the finale...I like Bernstein and Szell very much also.

#2 - several fine ones - Szell/CO - the early one, from 11/52
Barenboim/CSO - wonderful 2nd mvt - the CSO strings just eat up the part in a great show of section virtuoisty.

but best of all - Reiner/CSO from a live '57 performance - this one simply grows with each mvt...

#3 - again, lots of good ones - but Bernstein/NYPO edges out Barenboim/CSO, Solti/VPO and Toscanini/NBC

#4 - again. Bernstein wins it for me, narrowly over Barenboim/CSO, Szrll/CO and Levine/Philadelphia

Szell is good with each symphony....his set on Sony/CBS is very fine.

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 5:59 pm

I haven't heard Bernstein's NYPO recording. Does it differ much from his Vienna set?

Heck148 · Post by **Heck148** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 6:12 pm

keninottawa wrote:I haven't heard Bernstein's NYPO recording. Does it differ much from his Vienna set?

I've only heard some of the VPO set - more deliberate tempi, winds not highlighted as much..I didn't find the VPO ones esp exciting or attractive, not bad, but not outstanding.

his NYPO set is really quite excellent - esp #s 3 and 4.

Fugu · Post by **Fugu** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 7:04 pm

I like the Sawallisch and Goodman sets. I have many, including the Gardiner and the Zinman sets as well as a bunch of others.

Haydnseek · Post by **Haydnseek** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 9:44 pm

Fugu wrote:I like the ... Goodman sets.

Was that before or after Harry James left?

I listen to Zinman's earlier set with the Baltimore Symphony on Telarc most often. I also have Haitink's which is very well played but suffers somewhat from the rather thin sound that many early digital recordings exhibited.

Post by **Lance** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 12:43 am

I'm not generally an Erich Leinsdorf fan though I have many recordings of him from various periods of his professional life and certainly recognize his fine musicianship.

Having loved all four of Schumann's symphonies, I have a passion particularly for the Symphony No. 4 in D Minor. While Leinsdorf as at the helm of the Boston Symphony Orchestra, some things he recorded with them were quite magical and totally convincing interpretively, no doubt enhanced by the Boston Symphony who was probably at its absolute peak having come off the Koussevitzky and Munch years.

Leinsdorf recorded the Schumann Fourth in 1963 for RCA Victor. I waited and waited and was so pleased it finally came out on CD [RCA 60488, deleted unfortunately], coupled with Munch conducting the BSO in a recording made in 1959. Both of these performances stand out but the Leinsdorf was particularly noteworthy, one of the few times I was really impressed with his musicianship. His love for this work was truly apparent.

I have more to say about Schumann's orchestral works, but later on that.

The other outstanding recording is Wilhelm Furtwangler's on DGG (mono only), which I thought to be the other supreme recording of the work as someone else has mentioned in this thread.

Fugu · Post by **Fugu** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 1:08 am

Haydnseek wrote:
Fugu wrote:I like the ... Goodman sets.
Was that before or after Harry James left?

I listen to Zinman's earlier set with the Baltimore Symphony on Telarc most often. I also have Haitink's which is very well played but suffers somewhat from the rather thin sound that many early digital recordings exhibited.

This one:

http://www.amazon.com/Schumann-Symphoni ... B000003FMI

anasazi · Post by **anasazi** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 1:18 am

Heck148 wrote:Schumann symphonies have been recorded often, by many great conductors...

I don't have a favorite set tho - Barenboim/CSO [alot better than the later Berlin one], Bernstein's NYPO, and Szell/CO are pretty tough to beat...

Since I tend to agree with you about the Bernstein/NYPO and Szell/CO sets, perhaps I'll have to check out the Barenboim/CSO myself.

val · Post by **val** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 3:45 am

Regarding the Symphonies, I prefer the version of Sawallisch with the Staatskapelle Dresden. But Bernstein (NYP) and Lehmann (Bamberg) gave beautiful versions of the 2nd. In the 4th, the best version is, to me, Cantelli with the Philharmonia.

Regarding Manfred Overture, Furtwängler with the BPO gave one of the most extraordinary orchestral performances that I remember.

The set of Sawallisch also includes a superb version of Overture, Scherzo and Finale.

In the piano Concerto there are several great versions: Haskil with van Otterloo, Rubinstein with Giulini, Freire with Kempe.
Fournier and Fricsay are my favorites in the Cello Concerto.

RebLem · Post by **RebLem** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 9:05 am

anasazi wrote:
Heck148 wrote:Schumann symphonies have been recorded often, by many great conductors...
I don't have a favorite set tho - Barenboim/CSO [alot better than the later Berlin one], Bernstein's NYPO, and Szell/CO are pretty tough to beat...
Since I tend to agree with you about the Bernstein/NYPO and Szell/CO sets, perhaps I'll have to check out the Barenboim/CSO myself.

A Barenboim/CSO Schumann set? What? Are you sure that wasn't the one conducted by Andre Rieu, with Yanni in the Piano Concerto as a filler?

Heck148 · Post by **Heck148** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 9:39 am

RebLem wrote: A Barenboim/CSO Schumann set? What? Are you sure that wasn't the one conducted by Andre Rieu, with Yanni in the Piano Concerto as a filler?

really - on DG from the '77. his stellar rendition of the Konzertstuck for 4 Horns/orch dates from this time also.

RebLem · Post by **RebLem** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 10:03 am

Heck148 wrote:
RebLem wrote: A Barenboim/CSO Schumann set? What? Are you sure that wasn't the one conducted by Andre Rieu, with Yanni in the Piano Concerto as a filler?

really - on DG from the '77. his stellar rendition of the Konzertstuck for 4 Horns/orch dates from this time also.

Never heard of it, though I do know about the Konzerstuck, available in Australia on a 2 CD set with the piano concerto, the cello concerto, and the violin concerto performed by other orchestras and conductors.

slofstra · Post by **slofstra** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 2:58 pm

No takers on the Haitink, huh? My suspicions are that it would stand up fairly well and I will probably soon find out, as I have a BPO/ Furtwangler 4th on order from BSO ($2.99). Not the DG version, though.

On the piano concerto. Tovey describes it as "recklessly pretty". I listened again to Geza Anda with Kubelik, and I think he hits on Schumann's deep romanticism with his playing (the passion, the shifts in tempo and key, the rich melodic themes). By comparison I played some of Abbado/ Perahia for comparison and as much as I respect Perahia's playing, he does not mesh with the orchestra in the same way. I'd have to say that the Anda/ Kubelik version increases my estimation of the Schumann concerto, putting it in league with Beethoven's 3rd and 4th.

Barry · Post by **Barry** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 4:42 pm

slofstra wrote:No takers on the Haitink, huh? My suspicions are that it would stand up fairly well and I will probably soon find out, as I have a BPO/ Furtwangler 4th on order from BSO ($2.99). Not the DG version, though.

Without looking, I'd be surprised if the Furtwangler DG recording isn't available used or even new for a very low price from Amazon Marketplace.

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Sun Jul 22, 2007 5:46 pm

Lance -- you mention you especially enjoy the Symphony in D Minor. Do you prefer the original 1840s version or the "Re-Schumannized" version that is regularly heard? Personally I'm more fond of the latter, since a keen listener can practically hear the scratch marks of his pen as he re-scored the work.

Post by **Lance** » Mon Jul 23, 2007 12:44 am

keninottawa wrote:Lance -- you mention you especially enjoy the Symphony in D Minor. Do you prefer the original 1840s version or the "Re-Schumannized" version that is regularly heard? Personally I'm more fond of the latter, since a keen listener can practically hear the scratch marks of his pen as he re-scored the work.

According to jacket annotator Jay S. Harrison on the original LP's notes [RCA LSC-2701, issued 1964; the RCA "Silver Line" (budget-priced) CD has no notes whatsoever!], it appears this is the "re-Schumannized" version. Harrison comments that after seeing the "original" version of what is termed the "Fourth" symphony, one could well understand—when the work was first performed at a Leipzig Gewandhaus concert on December 6, 1841—why critics blasted the symphony. [To save me some research time, do you know, Ken in Ottawa, what recordings may exist of the "original" version?]

The other thing to remember is that the D Minor is NOT Schumann's Fourth Symphony in the actual numerical sequence of composition. It is the SECOND and carries No. 4 only because of the order of pubication. [This "order of publication" matter is so reminiscent of Beethoven's 1st and 2nd piano concerti, and likewise both of Chopin's.] The Third ("Rhenish") was actually the Fourth - and a wonderfully grand work is that one! But still, the Fourth in D Minor has always been my favourite of Schumann's four symphonies. I always think of Clara Wieck Schumann's remark when Robert was composing the symphony: "I hear D minor burning wildly in the distance." Let's face it, D minor is a wonderful key, at least for me, and especially in this fourth symphony!

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Mon Jul 23, 2007 9:07 am

Yes, Schumann was displeased with the reception that his then-second symphony earned and decided in the 1850s to re-orchestrate it for the purpose of conducting it before his Dusseldorf ensemble (I wonder what Clara thought of this -- he'd originally written the D minor for her!).

There are indeed recordings of the original version, and I recall having heard movements of the original symphony on the radio, but for the life of me I cannot recall which accounts I have heard. By doing a rough search, I found recordings by Roger Norrington and the Stuttgart RSO on Hänssler, Kurt Masur and the LPO as part of his Teldec set (apparently very good), and Thomas Dausgaard and the Swedish Chamber Orchestra on BIS.

I can recall that the 1841 version of the symphony sounds similar, but more "pianistic". It'd be enjoyable, I suppose, if you don't like timpani.

anasazi · Post by **anasazi** » Wed Jul 25, 2007 8:23 pm

Isn't the Bernstein/NYPH recording of the original? I'm not quite sure myself, even though I have them sitting on my shelf somewhere.

Jack Kelso · Post by **Jack Kelso** » Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:48 am

anasazi wrote:Isn't the Bernstein/NYPH recording of the original? I'm not quite sure myself, even though I have them sitting on my shelf somewhere.

No, the Bernstein/NYPhil is the 1852 version, which I prefer---mainly due to the added build-ups in the "ziemlich langsam" of the 1st mvt and the greater power in the bridge section between the 3rd & 4th mvts. You might be thinking of the "original orchestration", which at the time was not performed very often. Bernstein was, I believe, the first to record it....and thereby "prove" its value and beauty in the hands of a caring conductor.

I am REALLY shocked how many folks here like the Tonhalle Zürich recordings! I gave mine away.

These symphonies must be allowed to breathe---and here they don't. Any recording that takes the "Rhenish" in under 30 minutes (normal is 36, + or - 1 or 2 min.) is short-changing us in expressive dynamics and inner voices. Here, the 4th mvt (Feierlich) is taken more like an allegretto! It should not be performed in under 7 minutes. So far (from those I've heard), only Karajan takes it the right way. (And I'm normally NOT a fan of Karajan!).

Outside of Bernstein messing up the coda of the 3rd, his readings of the 2nd and 4th are excellent to superb. His "Spring" is a bit over-the-top.

My favorites:

Symphony No. 1 - George Szell, Cleveland Orch.

Symphony No. 2 - Bernstein/NYPhil. Levine and Eschenbach/Stuttgart are also excellent.

Symphony No. 3 - Karajan/Berlin Phil. Also, Giulini/L.A.Phil is very good, so is Berlin Phil. under Thielemann (excellent review, but not for the others).

Symphony No. 4 - Klemperer/Philharmonia, practically hands-down. It combines the precision of Szell and the power of Furtwängler. The sound is first-class and makes you wonder why anyone ever questioned Schumann's orchestral balance!

For the Piano Concerto, it's Serkin and Ormandy/Philadelphia. Others are fine, but nothing IMHO quite equals this in interpretation and orchestral sound and balance.

Lots of good ones for the 'Cello Concerto----du Pres and Starker are my favs, but Kliegel is fine, too.

I'm not crazy about Szell (except for 1st), especially in the 4th. He doesn't take the (practically mandatory repeat in 1st mvt) and crushes the expression in his search for perfection. I like him very much with almost any other composer.

By all means get Muti's performances of "Die Braut von Messina" Overture. The coda alone will pin you to the wall!

There are several fine ones of the Konzertstück für 4 Hörner und Orch., op. 86. We heard it live in Mannheim with four excellent soloists---what an experience!! Front-row center, too. A winner of a piece all round.

Muti's complete set is one of the best, right up there with Sawallisch. Kubelik is also good, but a little too well-behaved for this music.

Tschüß!
Jack

karlhenning · Post by **karlhenning** » Fri Jul 27, 2007 6:51 am

Well, I hope you're sitting down, Jack, because I still like the Zinman/Tonhalle recordings, and I think the symphonies 'breathe' just fine.

If the tempi are slow enough, you hold a mirror to the lips to make sure the symphony is still breathing, okay? :-)

Cheers,
~Karl

karlhenning · Post by **karlhenning** » Fri Jul 27, 2007 6:52 am

I do like Muti in other work, so I will seek him out at some point, thanks, Jack!

Cheers,
~Karl

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Fri Jul 27, 2007 10:04 am

Jack Kelso, how do you rate the Zinman/Tonhalle recordings vis-à-vis the Barenboim/Staatskapelle Berlin set? Does your preference lean towards the broader, more Romantic interpretation of the symphonies as exemplified by Barenboim?

I personally find his take on the set compelling, it's unlike anything I have heard before, but if anything there is too much timpani in the poor Rhenish. I imagine the waning Schumann would've liked it that way, though.

If there is one movement that I believe Barenboim nabs, it is the Feierlich, which is very broad and gloomy indeed, and I agree with you that it musn't be rushed.

I'll need to explore the Karajan take on the Rhenish, since I don't believe I've yet heard it.

slofstra · Post by **slofstra** » Sat Jul 28, 2007 1:12 pm

"Why would someone trade in this record?!"

There's a simple and sad answer to this. Estates. If anyone is interested in collecting historic LPs, this is a good time. I purchased the Tovey set of critical studies from a local dealer and his store is brimming with thousands of classical LPs.

Personally, I don't have the space.

Incidentally, Ken, if you were to purchase 3 sets of Schumann symphonies. Not necessarily the best, but also for the sake of obtaining a variety of competent approaches, which 3 would you buy?

I've also found it interesting that the Haitink/ Schumann set - people don't find it bad or good, it seems to be largely unnoticed. The Penguin doesn't even mention it, Amazon has only one review for it. Not in the Fanfare database. I did re-listen to it. It is a bit mushy, which isn't necessarily bad, but means its perhaps better suited to the boombox I used to have, whereas the good equipment I have today exposes its limitations.

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Sat Jul 28, 2007 3:49 pm

That's a great question, Slofstra, and though Schumann is one of my personal triumvirate of favourite composers (along with Borodin and Brahms), I'm still young and haven't heard enough of his symphony sets to give deep insight into the topic. Nevertheless, judging upon what I have heard, I would certainly retain the Barenboim set amongst my three sets, if only for its charged Romanticism. I'd like a more balanced, "Classical" approach in there, too, for which I would look to Dohnanyi and the Cleveland Orchestra on Decca (I'm surprised no one else has discovered these yet. And, because I know the sticklers on this forum would chase me down if I didn't include an interpretation by the Old Masters (

), I'd choose Sawallisch and the Dresdeners. I heard his Second on Studio Sparks a while back and very much liked it, and (judging on the accolades that the set has received), I imagine that he'd put a good, authentic North German approach into the whole set.

But, as I said, I've not the depth of experience to give a very insightful response.

Jack Kelso · Post by **Jack Kelso** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:04 am

keninottawa wrote:Jack Kelso, how do you rate the Zinman/Tonhalle recordings vis-à-vis the Barenboim/Staatskapelle Berlin set? Does your preference lean towards the broader, more Romantic interpretation of the symphonies as exemplified by Barenboim?

I personally find his take on the set compelling, it's unlike anything I have heard before, but if anything there is too much timpani in the poor Rhenish. I imagine the waning Schumann would've liked it that way, though. If there is one movement that I believe Barenboim nabs, it is the Feierlich, which is very broad and gloomy indeed, and I agree with you that it musn't be rushed.

I'll need to explore the Karajan take on the Rhenish, since I don't believe I've yet heard it.

Well, Ken---I guess you've read my opinion of Zinman's Schumann, especially the "Rhenish". Surprisingly, the CD is all over the place, no matter where I go shopping---there it is again! But some folks here are satisfied with the status quo and "good enough" is okay instead of better or best.

For the record (pun intended), Zinman's 4th mvt in the "Rhenish" is the quickest I've heard, and I cannot offer anyone here who might be curious any musical justification for it (except perhaps that he wanted to be "different"

). This symphony taken under 30 minutes?! (Karajan needs about 36 to bring out the majesty and power of it), Muti takes about 34. Brahms' 3rd, anyone?---In under 30 minutes?!

Barenboim's Schumann Second did little for me, but then again I'm comparing him with Bernstein (NY and Vienna), Levine, Herrewehge, Eschenbach---all superb "Seconds".

As for the 1st and 4th, there are many more acceptable recordings out there than of the 2nd and 3rd. My earlier post mentions some of the top ones).

Schumann wasn't "waning" when he wrote his "Rhenish".

Slowly but surely this old myth of his 3rd period being "weak" is dying, thanks to the efforts of many dynamic conductors (Herreweghe, Gardiner, etc.) pianists (Gilels, Richter, Schiff, etc.) and musicologists (Devario, Holliger, etc.) who refused to be indoctrinated by old, sub-standard opinions not based on thorough analyses of the scores. I have the score of the 3rd, and I don't see any problem with Schumann's very rhythmically expressive use of tympani (especially in the Finale). Nor have I read any negative critique about it. Maybe it's just the way Barenboim performed it---or the position of the microphones.

The review for the Karajan "Rhenish" stated that it "sets new interpretive standards" for this often poorly performed masterpiece. As in all other superior recordings, Karajan avoids the wrong-headed Mahler versions and does not tamper with the score.

Tschüß!
Jack

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 8:45 am

Jack Kelso wrote:Schumann wasn't "waning" when he wrote his "Rhenish".

I guess I didn't specify what I meant to say; when I said "waning", I was speaking in terms of mental ability compared to his 'glory days' of the 1840s. By the time Rhenish was published he was already experiencing debilitating auditory hallucinations, but at was nonetheless within his own wits. However, as you know, he had become so impersonal and effete that he couldn't properly conduct the Düsseldorf ensemble upon the symphony's debut, and the orchestra protested against his handicapping insularity.

I still find it amazing that while he was in the asylum in the year of his death, 1856, Schumann claimed that the ghost of Franz Schubert communicated a heavenly melody to him and he immediately scrawled down the melody and a series of variations based upon it. O to hear this work today! Waning in madness, waxing in artistry!

Oh, and I also have no problem with Schumann's timpani scoring -- indeed, it is one of the key elements that make his symphonies so beautifully bombastic -- but I feel that Barenboim's colouring of the percussion in the "Rhenish" is a bit over the top at times.

And I completely agree, Jack, with your comment about the Mahler versions. I'm going to have to re-explore the Karajan take!

Heck148 · Post by **Heck148** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 8:57 am

Jack Kelso wrote: Barenboim's Schumann Second did little for me, but then again I'm comparing him with Bernstein (NY and Vienna), Levine, Herrewehge, Eschenbach---all superb "Seconds".

Listen to his earlier CSO one, that is superb...

karlhenning · Post by **karlhenning** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 9:11 am

Jack Kelso wrote:Well, Ken---I guess you've read my opinion of Zinman's Schumann, especially the "Rhenish". Surprisingly, the CD is all over the place, no matter where I go shopping---there it is again!

I suppose this simply means that a lot of people like it better than you do.

But some folks here are satisfied with the status quo and "good enough" is okay instead of better or best.

Oh, sure, that's right, Jack; where an opinion differs to yours, there's someone with inferior discriminatory faculties . . . wait, I've got to de-select "Disable Smilies in this post"

Cheers,
~Karl

slofstra · Post by **slofstra** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 10:53 pm

Today, I received the Furtwangler - 4th and 1st. This is NOT the DG recording. It's not that good. I listened only to the 4th. Mind you, I don't think anyone can whip an orchestra into a froth the way Furtwangler does in the last movement of the 4th. But the reading seems so predictable - make the slow passages really slow, the build ups are hugely pregnant (at the end of the scherzo*), and then it's down hill as fast as you can go.

(* Actually, this recording has a different break between the third and fourth movement than the Haitink. I wondered why Haitink's fourth was 3:30 longer (or so), but his recording breaks well before the slow passage which appears in the scherzo of the Furtwangler.)

So immediately after hearing this, I played again the scherzo and last movement a la Haitink. The first problem is the sound - the Furtwangler sounded like it had been recorded from Deutsche Welle on a shortwave set. As soon as I put the Haitink scherzo on, there were the strings seperated from the bass violins, didn't notice that flute punctuating the end of the lines, and so on. I think Schumann benefits from texture in the playing because all the sections are often playing the same one or two subjects. Also, Haitink brings out more grandeur in the big bombastic finale, Furtwangler more fury. I'll give the closing bars to Furtwangler though.

Incidentally, I'm not trying to sell anyone on the Haitink. As I've stated before - it's the only Schumann symphony set I have, although now I have the Furtwangler too. (And it only cost $2.99).

Jack Kelso · Post by **Jack Kelso** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 1:12 am

karlhenning wrote:
Jack Kelso wrote:Well, Ken---I guess you've read my opinion of Zinman's Schumann, especially the "Rhenish". Surprisingly, the CD is all over the place, no matter where I go shopping---there it is again!
I suppose this simply means that a lot of people like it better than you do.

But some folks here are satisfied with the status quo and "good enough" is okay instead of better or best.
Oh, sure, that's right, Jack; where an opinion differs to yours, there's someone with inferior discriminatory faculties . . . wait, I've got to de-select "Disable Smilies in this post"

Cheers,
~Karl

Why, Karl---you surprise me. If you were to recommend a superior recording of a Prokofiev symphony I would be most anxious to hear it.

A powerful reason for the popularity of the Zinman double-CD is the price (6 € in Germany). By the way, Zinman's 1st and 4th are routine but okay. My criticism is aimed at his "Rhenish".

Of course, opinions do vary. But conductors should take care that their performances don't fly over important material that the composer intended the musicians to impart to the listeners. Zinman conducts Schumann as though he were Haydn--- galloping along straight-laced, correct, cool. If that's all you expect from the symphonic Schumann, well---okay. It's your ears that are doing the listening.

As with the symphonies of Bruckner and Brahms, a too quick reading of the score only loses in scope, breadth, expression and spirituality.

The 4th and 5th movements of this amazing E-flat Symphony are, in truth, one movement. They share common themes. Only in the noble coda of the 5th movement does everything "come together", where the themes of the 4th movement burst out in radiance. (By the way, Bernstein, normally a pretty dependable Schumann-interpreter, inexplicably begins to race to the finish-line here, tearing the solemnity and grandeur of this coda to shreds. Oddly, he's the only one to do this.)

"A lot of people liking" something doesn't make it the finest---otherwise Karajan would be regarded the "greatest conductor of all time", which he is not.

But here---with Schumann's greatest symphonic creation---he pulls up a real winner of a performance. Try it---you'll be pleasantly surprised.

Tschüß!
Jack

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 8:28 am

^ I wonder what a conductor like, say, Toscanini would've done to the "Rhenish"... Break the twenty-minute mark, perhaps?

On another note, does anyone have a recommendation for a recording of the Violin Concerto? It doesn't seem to be a piece that many reviewers want to take a stab at and it certainly isn't discussed very much.

Barry · Post by **Barry** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:08 am

Jack Kelso wrote: "A lot of people liking" something doesn't make it the finest---otherwise Karajan would be regarded the "greatest conductor of all time", which he is not.

I may not regard him as such, but I'm not sure how you can make a declarative statement like that. I'm sure plenty of people regard him as the best conductor ever, regardless of whether you or I may agree with them. I think it's pretty safe to say there is no general consensus as to who the greatest conductor of all time is. I did see Karajan come out on top of a reader's poll in a magazine once; not that that means much. He would probably make my top five though.

Heck148 · Post by **Heck148** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 3:20 pm

keninottawa wrote:^ I wonder what a conductor like, say, Toscanini would've done to the "Rhenish"... Break the twenty-minute mark, perhaps?

Toscannin's "Rhenish" with NBC [11/49] is really very excellent. it clocks in at c. 30'45"

Jack Kelso · Post by **Jack Kelso** » Thu Aug 02, 2007 1:07 am

keninottawa wrote:^ I wonder what a conductor like, say, Toscanini would've done to the "Rhenish"... Break the twenty-minute mark, perhaps?

On another note, does anyone have a recommendation for a recording of the Violin Concerto? It doesn't seem to be a piece that many reviewers want to take a stab at and it certainly isn't discussed very much.

As Heck pointed out, the Toscanini performance from 1949 was the recording (back in the 50's and early 60's) that set the standard.

Karajan's Berlin Phil. recording takes up where Toscanini left off, i.e. he follows the basic interpretative path of the older man and, with the advantage of improved sonics, brings to great advantage the marvelous thick Schumann sound by tempering the orchestral balance so that it doesn't sound mushy or disjointed. The wide-bore brass instruments come to the fore with heroic, noble and solemn tones. AND he takes almost 8 minutes to play the 4th movement

---a full minute longer than Muti. Now, that's what I call "Feierlich"

.

Giulini/L.A. Phil also give this symphony a powerful, broad reading---albeit a trifle slower (c.a. 38 min.), but it works. My home-town orchestra never sounded better! Giulini had a genius for giving slower performances that didn't drag, rather electrified each note with meaning.

Surprisingly, Tielemann's (Berlin Phil./DGG) is also a real winner....but the reviews for his other three weren't as strong as they were for his 3rd.

If you love this symphony, get all three. They ARE different enough to make the purchases more than worthwhile!

The Violin Concerto has been called a "Meisterwerk" by at least a few German musicologists---with one reservation: it is not in the same category as the Romantic virtuoso concerti of Beethoven, Mendelssohn, Brahms, Bruch, Tschaikowsky and Sibelius. It stands alone. It is part threnody, part concerto. It never bows its head to showmanship, rather it pours out emotion pure---with little regard for the soloist. Although not a virtuoso concerto, it is nevertheless a difficult work technically and difficult to interpret the intensity of its emotional turmoil.

Fortunately, there are several fine performances----Gidon Kramer has dedicated a major portion of his career in promoting this unique work. Also Hendryk Szyring's (on Mercury, I believe) is outstanding. If you can find it, the 1937 recording (Kulenkampf with Schmidt-Isserstedt/Berlin Phil.) is to me the most moving rendition, despite the dated sound. But the sonics are surprisingly quite good, better than many recordings of the early 1950's!

'Hope the above helps......

Tschüß!
Jack

Jack Kelso · Post by **Jack Kelso** » Thu Aug 02, 2007 1:13 am

Barry Z wrote:
Jack Kelso wrote: "A lot of people liking" something doesn't make it the finest---otherwise Karajan would be regarded the "greatest conductor of all time", which he is not.
I may not regard him as such, but I'm not sure how you can make a declarative statement like that. I'm sure plenty of people regard him as the best conductor ever, regardless of whether you or I may agree with them. I think it's pretty safe to say there is no general consensus as to who the greatest conductor of all time is. I did see Karajan come out on top of a reader's poll in a magazine once; not that that means much. He would probably make my top five though.

Well, you got me on that one, Barry

. Since there IS no "greatest conductor" I did Karajan a disservice. Certainly he was one of the finest masters of the baton---he's proven it in his Beethoven, Schumann, Wagner, Bruckner and Brahms recordings alone. And he's left us with an incomparable legacy of recordings, each with his individual stamp of perfection. Even if one prefer's Kubelik for this or Solti for that, there is no doubt he is always included in the highest competion.

Jack

karlhenning · Post by **karlhenning** » Thu Aug 02, 2007 8:08 am

Jack Kelso wrote:And he's left us with an incomparable legacy of recordings, each with his individual stamp of perfection.

Oh, there are some real turkeys in there, too, Jack, don't worry :-)

Cheers,
~Karl

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Thu Aug 02, 2007 12:51 pm

Jack, thanks for your recommendations. I'm going to look into that Gidon Kremer disc sooner rather than later to take advantage of the Schumann shopping spree that I seem to be on this summer.

Jack Kelso · Post by **Jack Kelso** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 12:47 am

karlhenning wrote:
Jack Kelso wrote:And he's left us with an incomparable legacy of recordings, each with his individual stamp of perfection.
Oh, there are some real turkeys in there, too, Jack, don't worry

Cheers,
~Karl

Certainly, Karl. NO conductor interpreted all periods, all nationalities and all styles equally well.

His Holst's "The Planets" was criticized as being "too Germanic" and I do believe (as a Rimsky-Korssakov fan) you will agree that his "Scheherezade" has been performed by others with more Russian feeling than Karajan could give it.

.

His Haydn and Mozart are a bit "too clean", even romanticized for my taste, perhaps too calculating. I prefer Beecham or Mogens Woldike for Haydn especially.

Tschüß!
Jack

rwetmore · Post by **rwetmore** » Mon Aug 06, 2007 10:02 pm

I recently listened the Klemperer recording of the 1st with the Philharmonia. It wasn't as good as I remember it being....it's just too slow - needs more pep. A shame really since he gets such a great and clear sound from the orchestra.

I generally find most recordings of the Schumann symphonies unlistenable, especially the 3rd, which too often sounds like gooey, washed out orchestrational chaos to me.

Good ones are the Szell and Levine 4ths - I can listen to those.

Jack Kelso · Post by **Jack Kelso** » Tue Aug 07, 2007 12:09 am

rwetmore wrote:I recently listened the Klemperer recording of the 1st with the Philharmonia. It wasn't as good as I remember it being....it's just too slow - needs more pep. A shame really since he gets such a great and clear sound from the orchestra.

I generally find most recordings of the Schumann symphonies unlistenable, especially the 3rd, which too often sounds like gooey, washed out orchestrational chaos to me.

Good ones are the Szell and Levine 4ths - I can listen to those.

Klemperer is not at his best in the First. Try his Fourth. If you get the recommended recordings I mentioned earlier in this thread you shouldn't have any problems learning to appreciate these great works.

Tschüß!
Jack

The Classical Music Guide Forums

Schumann's Orchestral Works

Schumann's Orchestral Works

Re: Schumann's Orchestral Works

Who is online