Symphony One: Sergiu Celibidache; Royal Festival Hall; May 31, 1979 (it was meant to be a Karl Böhm concert but he cancelled and the LSO managed to get Celi who did the advertised programme, Brahms Three & One):
Symphony Two: Colin Davis; Barbican Hall; May 1997:
Symphony Three: Antal Dorati; Mercury studio recording; July 1963:
Symphony Four: Felix Weingartner; February 14, 1938; Columbia studio recording made at Abbey Road:
LSO Abbey Road encore:
What’s with the LSO? Brahms heard Weingartner conduct his Second Symphony in 1895 and wrote to his publisher Simrock: ‘….[The programme] began with my symphony which he conducted from memory and quite splendidly. Even after just the first movement, the whole orchestra had to rise in thanks. The third movement had to be repeated. The performance was quite wonderful.’
Weingartner recorded all four Brahms symphonies in London in 1938-40; two with the LPO [2 & 3] and two with the LSO [1 & 4]. After 40-odd years, any artists interpretation may change: but with Brahms himself praising Weingartner as no other conductor, we have to assume the composer knew what he was writing about.
Bob, I have just posted this with the Philharmonia Orchestra, http://www.colinscolumn.com/giuseppe-sinopoli-1946-2001-conducts-the-philharmonia-orchestra-in-bruckners-fourth-symphony-romantic-september-16-1988-suntory-hall-tokyo/.
To answer your LSO question as I think you meant it, there is a hell of a lot of LSO material on YouTube, placed there by LSO supporters from broadcasts. Whatever I might search for inevitably brings up some LSO-related entry. Colin
Interesting.
I have rediscovered my Boult CD cycle and think very highly of it.
Boult took over Sargent’s late Proms performances and suddenly I began to enjoy this music which previously had been rather heavy and unappealing to my young senses.
His cycle reminds me of my conversion with all repeats intact.
The music flows effortlessly and there are no attempts to play anything other than what Brahms wrote. No distortions. A lovely, natural experience.
Yes Edward, Boult’s Brahms cycle for EMI is very fine (mostly LPO, LSO in No.3), especially the first two Symphonies, which are among the very best of either work. Colin
I assumed your original posting (above) was perhaps to start a debate about great Brahms symphony recordings – in which case, I submit, the LSO would not invariably appear. I agree with Edward about Boult’s Nixa LPO set from the 1950s – though the original LP pressings were not too good – almost any CD reissue of his first truly integral set is worth having, especially if from the original tapes. The later HMV LPO/LSO set is not, interpretatively, on quite the same level.
Always happy to start a debate, Bob, but that wasn’t the intention. I believe Edward is referring to Boult’s EMI Brahms recordings, “all repeats”, which I don’t think applies to his earlier Nixa set. Colin
No – you’re right there, Colin – the Nixas are notable for not including repeats (except I think in No 3 – if memory serves). But my initial comment was really a plea for Weingartner’s Brahms – Monteux’s, too, and those conductors who knew Brahms personally and recorded his music: Enescu, Max Fiedler, Weingartner, Arnold Rosé, Mengelberg and Monteux.
From Antony Hodgson:
“That slowing down (often gross slowing down) for the motto theme is one of the worst conductorial crimes. Amazing how many commit it – even Sir Adrian Boult who was never one to override a composer’s tempo requirements. Among those who do not commit it are van Beinum. Scherchen, Paita and (except for one old radio broadcast) Horenstein. It seems ridiculous to slow down not long after Brahms has indicated a faster speed. Celibidache is free in tempo elsewhere in the performance but his subjective adjustments make sense so he was clearly the right musician to represent Brahms properly in that coda.”