Brahms you must hear

[mbhaub]

Ok - Brahms, esp the symphonies, are hardly unsung, and this post is not the intent of the Unsungcomposers, but hear me out...

We've had lots of comments about historical conductors and why we don't seem to have the same level of brilliance as in the past. Well, yesterday I finally got around to listening to a set of Brahms symphonies I've read about for years, but have never heard: the older mono NY Philharmonic versions with Bruno Walter. I've always been a fan of his stereo remakes with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra, but nothing prepared me for the mono versions.

They are brisk, virile, at time ferocious. This is conducting! I have never heard anything like it on records or live. Every thing just seems "right" - this is how Brahms should go. No micromanaging. No overinflating it into Mahler. No turning it into historical events. Just thrilling music making. Anyone who thinks Walter was a boring old man needs to hear this set. The mono sound is excellent and in fact, you can hear some details that are missing in some modern recordings.

One movement I've played repeatedly is the finale of the 2nd. You have to hear the coda to believe it. Walter accelerates it to a stunning pace - the virtuosic orchestra goes right along flawlessly  - and never lets. The brass playing is spectacular - no restrained trombones either - loud and proud! Just lifts you right out of your seat. I played the Bernstein/VPO for comparison - no contest. Maazel/Cleveland is even worse  as he puts on the brakes in the coda.

So let's say that 100 years ago Brahms was played this way. I can see why Brahms' music triumphed and became part of the repertoire while music by the unsungs didn't. Frankly, even with virtuoso conductors, there isn't a single movement in any symphony by the beloved forgotten composers which comes near the thrilling, electrifying, even hair-raising finale of the Brahms 2nd. Surely not every performance in the old days was on this level. Like he recent Schuricht Beethoven cycle re-release, this Brahms set has made it very clear how impoverished we are today in terms of great conducting.

If you've never heard this set you must if great music making is something you're interested in. I got it really, really cheap, brand new from the UK for under $8 USD. I have a lot (too many, really) sets of Brahms symphonies. Mono sound or not, this goes straight to the top of the pile.

[Alan Howe]

Glad though I am to read of this set of Brahms' symphonies, the topic's clearly beyond our remit. So, in response, perhaps we could restrict ourselves to suggested rivals (from the unsung symphonic repertoire) to the finale of Brahms 2 as candidates for the most thrilling symphonic movement...

My candidate: Raff 2 (finale). In fact, almost anything by Raff is more exciting than Brahms - there's just far more sheer dynamism everywhere.

[Mark Thomas]

the topic's clearly beyond our remit

That said, I'm most grateful to you, Martin, for mentioning this set and I will search it out myself.

[Alan Howe]

The Walter set can be sampled here (in a different transfer):
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Brahms-Symphonies-Walter-Philharmonic-1951-53/dp/B003VQCTOA/ref=dm_cd_album_lnk

[Mark Thomas]

And the tracks from the Naxos transfer are downloadable here.

[Alan Howe]

Any candidates for 'most thrilling symphonic movement' from among the unsungs?

[eschiss1]

At the moment and pointing to my signature I'd have difficulty deciding between two, both finales, Stenhammar's G minor (I will -not- call it "symphony no.2"; it is his one and only acknowledged symphony) and Furtwängler symphony no.2 (Järvi on BIS and Barenboim on Teldec, by preference.)

[alberto]

My candidate would be the "Finale. Presto" from Berwald's Sinfonie Singuliere (preferred performances : Celibidache, Swedish Radio Sym. Orch., 1967, live, IMG Artists (not at all slow) ; Markevich, Berliner Phil., DG). 

[Mark Thomas]

Three Russian nominees from me: the finales of both Kalinnikov's symphonies and of Glazunov's Fifth. You could never accuse any of them of subtlety, but for sheer whistling-along, arm-waving enjoyment, they are hugely effective in the right hands. Big tunes, propulsive rhythms, blazing brass and feverishly busy strings - what's not to love about them?

[DennisS]

I would like to nominate the the 3-part finale of Braga Santos's symphony no 4. The Lento/Allegro/Epilogue(Hymn to Youth)finale is both exciting and in the epilogue moving and uplifting. Its big tune is also memorable. I too could easily have nominated the finales of both Kalinnikov symphonies, both wonderful symphonies and not just for their finales! I come back to them repeatedly.

[eschiss1]

As to "Brahms you must hear", a concert with some of his Zigeunerlieder early in my first year of college (followed by, the next year, a seminar on his chamber music) told me how little of his music I knew, and I still haven't heard much of his unaccompanied choral music (I hear good things of the double-choir works particularly), except that in a good performance it can be quite good indeed... not too surprising, since choral conductor describes well a lot of his early training. (I submit if one can have two pages about unsung Schumann and close a thread about unsung Brahms with a sideswipe at him, one can have a word- well, alright, two sentences- in his defense as well.)

[JimL]

I really like the finale of the Catoire Symphony.  Is this limited to symphonies?

[edurban]

Two rousing final movements from symphonies:  Glazunov 5 (Jarvi) and Saint-Saens 1 (Martinon)Even the scraps of fugue in the Saint-Saens are thrilling and you have to love the four harps...

David

[chill319]

A couple of days ago I was listening, once again in awe, to the finale of Draeseke 3. If an equally sustained, effective, and unbroken musical argument was written between Beethoven's Grosse Fuge and this movement's development (in the sense of Durchführung), I haven't heard it.  To my ears, no recorded performance has yet fulfilled the pressing force of the development's drive by making, as I think Draeseke intended, the return of the symphony's haunting opening chords the shattering, and ineluctable, high point of the movement. But though I've never heard the finale played as I think it should be, I unhesitatingly nominate it as one of the three or four greatest symphonic finales of the romantic period, Beethoven 9 being at the head of the class.

The Glazounov 5 finale is certainly one of the most effective and entertaining in the repertory, but the level of musical argument is not as high. Like Eric, I find the Stenhammar G minor finale to be of an exceedingly high quality. Like Alberto, I find Berwald's Singulaire is a work of genius. For me, the Draeseke 3 finale surpasses all three. I have not heard Raff 2 yet.

[eschiss1]

Sometimes I feel fortunate that Glazunov's symphonies are played so often on classical stations (radio & TV) around here that I was a little surprised that they're still considered unsung (apologies). (Then again, Mahler was until not-so-long-ago, whose 6th's finale I always consider a very serious contender in this category and hope to hear live sooner than later. (Similarly the finale- or at least, the wracked, seemingly war-haunted- and first-movement-haunted (that woodwind melody) too - concluding section, alas not the whole finale- of a work I have had the good fortune of hearing live in an eccentric but quite good performance... - though as it was written in 1947 - well... hrm. _Does_ Prokofiev sym. 6 count?... hrm. Ah well. Hush, Eric.)