The one conductor who's never disappointed me is Thomas Beecham. I recently listened to his recording of the 4th on EMI. At the end, I said to myself, "Wow, that was really fun!" Not the reaction I was expecting, but Beecham was indeed special. 😊
I've heard the disc which includes the Nutcracker suite and the Waltz from Eugene Onegin. It's only been in recent years that I really got into Beecham, mainly because he did music I wasn't interested in or because I already had recordings I liked. I knew really only his Delius and his Handel arrangements. Anyway, I think he nails my first test. First, I love the fact that the music moves, even dances, in the opening movement (I dislike swoony Tchaikovsky). The accelerandi and ritardandi are superbly judged. The second movement is let down by intonation problems in the winds. The scherzo is beset by raggedy, underpowered strings, and the problem continues in the finale. BUT it doesn't matter all that much. Beecham's realization of the architecture of the score and his gift of forward movement (there's a delightful bounce to his rhythms, even during cantabile passages) count for a lot. Despite my nits (directed at the RPO players), this is a disc to treasure.
@@steveschwartz8944 Yes!!! You nailed it. It’s Beecham’s handling of rhythm that makes this performance so enchanting. His Symphonie Fantastique is another favorite of mine, and one of the most haunting performances I’ve heard. And his Beethoven 7th is as spectacular as Dave Hurwitz says it is. Happy listening!
Yes!!!! So glad you included Muti Dave. Heard Jurowski conducting the London Philharmonic in Tchaikovsky 4 when they toured Australia a fews ago. The orchestra was aflame. Of course i knew it was going to be great and it was. I have Jurowski’s Tchaikovsky/LPO cycle which is every bit as wonderful as Muti’s first cycle with the Philharmonia . The Isle of The Dead was also on the program.. In many ways it’s my favourite Tchaikovsky symphony. It’s an electrifying experience. More recently Muti conducted Tchaikovsky 5 here in Sydney. Yes, it was marvellous, but not in the class of his first cycle. Jurowski performance was an approximation of Muti, the young firebrand, in that first cycle. Surprised Dave that you mentioned Abbado. Much listen 👍
Another fantastic repertoire review that demonstrates your sublime musical eloquence. Once again I was cheered, but not surprised that my first CD acquisition of this symphony was the great Markevitch performance that continues to thrill me today, even after acquiring several other excellent CDs of this great symphony.
Yes, Svetlanov. Thank you for including the two recordings (I am unfamiliar with the live traversal in Tokyo). My admiration of his interpretation was indelibly etched even before with the last bars of the first movement of the studio recording, which turns into a whirlwind of notes. I was reminded of the Mvarinsky stereo 4th's last movement. Such thrilling impact from both! My gut feeling is that most listener's are still unaware of the worthiness and rewards of Svetlanov in this work. Speaking of rewards, you're always giving your listener's the best in your talks - entertaining, to be sure, and much to be gained whether or not one agrees with you on particular choices of CD's.
Ferenc Fricsay, with the RIAS Symphony Orchestra Berlin, 1952, brings some of the great qualities we find in his 6th Symphony. Fricsay senses how music breathes, micro pauses, and the smallest stretches and squeezes in tempo, hardly perceptible, make the music drive forward and tell a story. He brings out echoes that connect the movements together through phrasing and colour. Most of all, he knows exactly where the key moments and climaxes are. Every movement of his Pathetique has its special moment, for example in movement one, you know exactly when the recapitulation starts, whereas in most performances you think it's still the development; Fricsay slows down and goes LOUD. It's great. The second movement of the 4th is wonderful, as if a folk tale is unfolding. The scherzo and finale feel like part of the same story, all folky and at the same time forming a whole with first movement. Tchaik's friend Taneyev thought the 4th was a symphonic poem with three other movements slapped on. That's how it often feels, but that's not Tchaikovsky's fault, its the interpretation.
I would mention two recordings that i really like. It's Ladislav Slovak who recorded the symphony with the Czech Philharmonic (on Supraphon), the orchestra is stunning in this recording, they play with passion i much energy. The second recording is with Maazel and Vienna. He really conducts the first transparent like no one conductor. And the other movements are really very beautiful played.
An excellent survey as usual. I have almost all of these recordings of the 4th and for the most part agree with your observations. I must say that after 60+ years of listening to the 4th I return to Monteux and Boston.............and for the 5th.............and for the 6th as well.
Fully knowing that you didn't forget it David, but may I please mention the Ashkenazy/Philharmonia Tchaik 4, part of the other great 4,5,6 collection. Just love to see it mentioned here in the comments!
Wonderful review, thank you Dave! What I have appreciated the most is the passage where you underline the influence of koussewitzky on American orchestras in relation to russian/French composers.
I like Stokowski's Tchaikovsky, but I freely admit it is not "cricket". That Barenboim set is really something. I was in my car some years back, and I remember hearing the 5th on the radio, and thinking all along that he was doing everything just the way I wanted it to go. Just so satisfying. Then the announcer said it was Barenboim, and I was shocked. "Good for him", I thought.
Thank you for a very interesting talk on one of my favourite symphonies and I am very pleased that you chose the Mravinsky as your 'however' choice. My first recording of this was that of the RPO, conducted by Anatole Fistoulari, because it was the coupling to Fistoulari's amazing Sleeping Beauty on Eloquence. I would be interested to hear what you think of it.
I have seven of these recordings (and many others) and totally agree about the Mravinsky. What I would like to add IMHO is that Mravinsky's is also so interesting (important?) because I don't think we will ever hear this symphony played like this again no matter how good a performance and the reason is the orchestra. What an orchestra!!! It was possibly the best in Europe at the time but more than that the sound of the winds and brass, I adore it! The icing on the cake for me is the French horns, such a gorgeous sound (this applies to all the Mravinsky recordings really), I doubt we will ever hear such a sound again and it is such a pity.
LOVE what you say about Ormandy 's humanity in the context of the thrust passion and weight he exudes from the strings specifically and the first movement's recapitulation
Hei Dave, will you do a review of the new Reiner Höneck CD, Beethoven 6? I am really curious on your opinion on that one, being such an eclectic interpretation.
I boned up on it with Markevitch as I had planned to attend an amateur orchestral concert tonight (Stockport Symphony). It was great to hear live music again (We had Joanna McGregor as soloist for Brahms 1st as first piece on the programme). One thing I liked about the Stockport Symphony was the clarity and you could hear the slight English accent on the music from this English orchestra, The brass were particularly phenomenal. Totally different experiences of course!
I'm maybe in the minority here but besides the usual hysterical, bombastic classics I have a soft spot for Kurt Masur's Fourth with the Gewandhausorchester, a really good display of thinking in symphonic structures, building those climaxes inexorably but also finding ways to carefully craft inward moments too. And the one which really looks ahead keeping the last ounce of reserve power up to the final peroration, avoiding the feeling of reaching the "ceiling" too early, running out of stream for the last surge of exstatic excitement.
I'm in the minority with you. For me, it's Masur or Solti when I want to hear this symphony. Masur's Pathetique is just as fine; these really show what KM was capable of, & that's emotive, exciting conducting.
Not sure how many versions Szell recorded but I have always enjoyed his 1962 recording with the LSO. I have the resissue on the Decca Historical series coupled with Beethoven's Egmont Incidental Music. The story goes that the legendary producer John Culshaw was not happy with Szell's slightly slow tempo in the last movement and told him so. This so annoyed Szell that when they recorded one final version, Szell did pick up the tempo and the result sounds almost white hot!
I’d add MTT and San Francisco to the list. I think he was trying to emphasize the yearning and nostalgic aspects of the piece. A rehearsal video makes clear that he wanted to avoid the “let’s bash the hell out of it” school. He does radically change the bowing so that the first theme begins on up bow, making the entrance somewhat tentative, not putting all the cards on the table and very consistent with his conception of the work.
thanks, I'll check Barenboim's recording out. Because of the live tv version of what I thought to be an attrocious, anti-musical Tchaikovsky's 4th on youtube, I never was interested to listen to the cd recordings. Thanks for the recommendation.
Great choices all. However, I'm a bit surprised you left out Szell's recording with the LSO. The first three movements are up to his usual standard but then the finale! I've never heard anyone do the finale like that. Maybe you'll say it's too quick. Maybe it's a bit unbalanced when compared with the less intense first movement, but it's beyond thrilling! And still in complete control!
No, actually, he's not in complete control. I find it to be just a bit below his usual standard (and so did he, by the way), which is why I left it out.
True; it is one of the best. One issue is the sound, which is not great. The second minor minus is Szells approach to be too rhytmically precise in the second movement. Besides that it is as dramatic as Svetlanov and russian school.
I enjoyed your reviews of this classic and downloaded Ivan Fischer's because I needed a good modern audiophile version since the five recordings I have were all from the 60s, 70s and 80s. It is indeed an outstanding recording and the Budapest Festival Orchestra is obviously extensively rehearsed. The sonics are spectacular, but unfortunately I did not read your comments from 2/17/2005 on your website about an audio "pulsation" on this recording (sounds like a ticking watch) before I downloaded it that unfortunately was audible (during quiet passages) through my high quality earbuds which is how I listen to music these days. Some of your other recommendations are not available to download. I have had Mravinsky's recording for many years and agree with you that the 4th Symphony is by far his best recording of the three. I heard Andre Previn conduct the L.A. Philharmonic back in the 70s take the finale almost as fast.
One that surprised me was Solti's with the CSO. Very exciting and well recording in typical decca sound. Big and bold with the glorious brass section with the strings playing their hearts out. Certain one of Solti's great achievements.
Solti's Tchaikovsky 4 was the first CD I ever bought. Was it 1985 or so? For me, it has that "nothing like the first time" vibe that Dave discussed a while back.
Otto Mueller famously insisted his students do the first movement in 3/4 + 3/8 for each measure. Reworked his score and everything. One former student remarked that this was "completely missing the point."
i think I might have the answer with your Muti conundrum: having observed him often with the Bavarian Radio Orchestra I noticed he did care about the sound, as he eloquently and entertainingly talked a lot about it. the operative word is TALKED. then the time came where he'd have to( being a conductor and all) SHOW it with his arm gesture. and there lies the problem. " it's the sun coming out blablabla' he said painting a great picture of the part of the celli in La mer and then the movement was like chopping meat. the musicians who were hanging from his every word, in the end ( as it always happens) responded instictively to the conductor's body /arm movement and the sound of the 'sun rising romantically so ect' sounded justy like he showed, not said: dry and uninspired.
I recommend the Fedosseyev 1984 recording with the Moscow Radio Symphony, the best alternative to Mravinsky IMO. it is similar to the Abbado VPO but better....orchestral colours brilliantly elicited, and the strings you rave about in Ormandy truly sing with a wonderful Russian passion and sweep (keeping in mind you think Tchaikovsky's music is 'Italian') including in the 'recapitulation'. In the finale he doesn't try to match Mravinsky's unmatchable pace, so gets tremendous details highlighted with the bass and percussion just crashing tremendously. Very well recorded too. Found this in the local library and was very impressed.
@@HarinderJadwani Sure. I hear nothing in that recording that hasn't been done as well or better by many others, including Muti, Markevitch. Janowski, Solti, Ormandy, Maazel, Abbado (as you mentioned), etc. And the orchestra is nothing special.
I really struggle with the shrill trumpets in the Mravinsky recordings. I was kinda hoping you weren't going to include him, so I could be justified in not particularly enjoying them, given that everybody says they're the ones to get! But hey, I guess I need to hear beyond them...
Nah, it’s ok to dislike recordings no matter what other people think of them. If you want to hear beyond the trumpets, go for it! But if you can’t or would rather not, that’s awesome too.
I have to agree. It is what it is but the performances can not be questioned. In comparison Abbado's 4th has the better sound and more refinement from his band.
I love the Mravinsky 4-6, but if in your shoes, I would just skip it. It's true that sometimes one has to struggle with the material - letting go of "the pleasure principle", so to speak; but there is no reason to succumb yourself to musical masochism! Put Monteux and Boston in your cd-tray instead!
It's so funny you are doing a presentation on this right now: I have been listening to this symphony almost exclusively over the last month. My favorite treatment of the second movement is actually von Karajan's recording on Angel (from the early 70's). He does a lovely job with it: the rest of the recording is okay - I feel that there are some sound engineering issues. Von Karajan did another version on DG which isn't nearly as good. I agree with your assessment that von Karajan wasn't "passionate" about this music as he could have been, but I do like his second movement on this one particular recording. It's refreshing to hear your take on newer conductors: I have been feeling the way you do, but thought it was just because I am becoming an old grump
That's why I thought it's a mistake that Berlin Philharmonic didn't consider Muti as Principal Conductor. Was it because Muti was committed with La Scala or Berlin just didn't like him?
A rather unruffled exposition of Tchaikovsky's innovative symphony. Thanks! Probably the only time that a composer completely explained his compositional methods in various letters to his benefactor (Nadeshda von Meck), to whom the symphony was dedicated...
Great overview! I just wonder why you think the sound quality of he DSO with van Zweden is bad. I own the disk and didn’t remember a bad sound. So I listened again just now and the sound is actually pretty good. Instruments are clear, dynamic range is good if not great. I’m not an audiophile person, but got a decent system (Marantz). I wonder if your CD copy is ok, otherwise I can’t understand how we could come to such different conclusions.
Purely for sentimental reasons (not critical ones) it is worth noting Bernstein's last Tchaikovsky Fourth Symphony recording was (as far as I know) the last time he conducted the New York Philharmonic.
Argenta with La Suisse Romande in Decca. Noble, no strings attached, it seems to be just about to fall down in several places in the first and last movement, the orchestra is not up to it. The climax of the main theme in the recapitulation of the first is top notch, as well as the "destiny" brass introducing the coda, and I love the controlled accellerando at the end, then rallentando to let the strings scream the main theme again. The ending of the Andantino is extremely sad and sensitive, when the bassoons take over the melody. I love this performance. Classic, strained, lively, with lots of contrast. I only wish he had recorded it with the LSO like he did the violin concerto.
My two criteria for performances of this symphony come down to how conductors get through the first movement without running out of gas (perhaps one fate motive too many) and how well they handle the scherzo. Everybody I've heard on David's list passes the first test. However, Markevitch's scherzo seems too slow, even stodgy, to me. It surprised me when I heard it. Indeed, I really like Markevitch only in the first three symphonies. The last three are good, but not extraordinary like the others. As far as sets go, I'd take Markevitch in the first three, Mravinsky in the last three. I also like Szell, mostly for sentimental reasons, since he was my hometown conductor and his was my first recording of the Fourth.
Dave, I have the feeling that this is one of the most difficult comparative reviews to do. Worse than any of the Beethoven or Brahms symphonies. There are just so many recordings of this as it’s such a popular concert second half piece. I’m not going to count but I wouldn’t be surprised if I didn’t have about twenty recordings here, as it so often turns up in conductor boxes… You did prompt me to listen to the Jurowski recording, as I was puzzled by it when I first listened. It sounds very different from the famous others as though it’s on a large chamber orchestra. Not sure what I think. But there’s a long gap between the fourth and fifth symphonies (11 years?) and maybe this is what he is trying to highlight. 11 years in the rather shorter lives of many 18th and 19th century composers is an age. So.. I will listen to the Mravinsky again I’m sure I haven’t since my teens, but the packaging of symphonies 4-6 as a sort of group, in which the Mravinsky recordings played such a role, might be encouraging misleadingly over-weighty performances of the fourth in particular. Not sure, but thanks for making me think about this!
Hola David. Veo que no tuviste en cuenta la mítica grabación de Szell con la Orquesta de Claveland. Es solo una omisión o no te parece especial esa grabación?
The first time I ever heard Mravinsky was in one of those conductor anthologies documentaries where they featured him conducting the closing pages of Shostakovich's Fifth. I would have liked to see the expression on my face. How can anyone completely drain the emotional content out of music like this? But, I have listened further and that is his approach. I understand that it may appeal to some. It is not what I seek in music. And my favorite Tchaikovsky's fourth is completely opposite of Mravinsky's: it's the later DG Bernstein. Definitely not the fastest Fourth out there.
Can't disagree with your recommendations... Some other interesting ones are: Bohm/LSO - the way he takes the first movement coda... So un-Bohm! 🙂 Dorati/LSO - granted, not as good as 1-3 but still speedy and exciting Silvestri/Philharmonia - if you can ignore the weird Fate rhythm then it is a very fine performance As for more modern recordings I think Pappano did a decent 4 (and 5 & 6 too) Curious to know what you make of Hans Rosbaud, there have been a number of reissues recently which you've covered (Mahler and Sibelius I think) but not Tchai 4 & 5...
@@DavesClassicalGuide yes, interesting indeed. The other thing to mention about quite a lot of recordings (I think started by Karajan and then mimicked by others) was slowing up at the end of the first movement. I think Bernstein does it too. Again, not at all what Tchaikovsky wrote... It needs to be in tempo. Forgot to say Fricsay too! Well worth a listen!
Hi Dave, I was looking for your Tchaik 5 repertoire video to prepare for listening to the new Honeck/Pittsburgh recording and I don’t think you’ve done one! I see the Ideal list and the Dave’s Fave (so I’m about to listen to the Haitink, naturally), but I don’t see a whole video on the 5th. Maybe a combo Honeck review / repertory video?
I’m surprised you didn’t mention any of Karajan’s. For me his 70’s take is one for the ages, and the one on video too. Kurt Sanderling’s is also a classic noisy and passionate as the russians can play it. The other one that recently surprised me was Gergiev with VPO.
That’s also with DG, right? I already did a while back, and still preferred the 70’s one, but I will give it a second listen ;). I think in the one from the 60s he makes the violins do that terrible pause in the tremolo of the coda xD That is a great turnoff for me. @אופק אללוף
@@masintec I've actually heard snippets of the LSO recording the difference between that and the Czech recording is night and day. The Czech Phil is a much more superior orchestra with the outer two movements absolutely visceral and even the quieter moments like the clarinet theme in first movement has Bohm brings out the ballet music side of Tchaikovsky that few conductors can do. You can't find it on streaming and you have to order the CD online.
The one conductor who's never disappointed me is Thomas Beecham. I recently listened to his recording of the 4th on EMI. At the end, I said to myself, "Wow, that was really fun!" Not the reaction I was expecting, but Beecham was indeed special. 😊
I've got to hear this! Thanks for putting me on to it.
I've heard the disc which includes the Nutcracker suite and the Waltz from Eugene Onegin. It's only been in recent years that I really got into Beecham, mainly because he did music I wasn't interested in or because I already had recordings I liked. I knew really only his Delius and his Handel arrangements.
Anyway, I think he nails my first test. First, I love the fact that the music moves, even dances, in the opening movement (I dislike swoony Tchaikovsky). The accelerandi and ritardandi are superbly judged. The second movement is let down by intonation problems in the winds. The scherzo is beset by raggedy, underpowered strings, and the problem continues in the finale. BUT it doesn't matter all that much. Beecham's realization of the architecture of the score and his gift of forward movement (there's a delightful bounce to his rhythms, even during cantabile passages) count for a lot. Despite my nits (directed at the RPO players), this is a disc to treasure.
@@steveschwartz8944 Yes!!! You nailed it. It’s Beecham’s handling of rhythm that makes this performance so enchanting. His Symphonie Fantastique is another favorite of mine, and one of the most haunting performances I’ve heard. And his Beethoven 7th is as spectacular as Dave Hurwitz says it is. Happy listening!
Yes!!!! So glad you included Muti Dave. Heard Jurowski conducting the London Philharmonic in Tchaikovsky 4 when they toured Australia a fews ago. The orchestra was aflame. Of course i knew it was going to be great and it was. I have Jurowski’s Tchaikovsky/LPO cycle which is every bit as wonderful as Muti’s first cycle with the Philharmonia . The Isle of The Dead was also on the program.. In many ways it’s my favourite Tchaikovsky symphony. It’s an electrifying experience. More recently Muti conducted Tchaikovsky 5 here in Sydney. Yes, it was marvellous, but not in the class of his first cycle. Jurowski performance was an approximation of Muti, the young firebrand, in that first cycle. Surprised Dave that you mentioned Abbado. Much listen 👍
Another fantastic repertoire review that demonstrates your sublime musical eloquence. Once again I was cheered, but not surprised that my first CD acquisition of this symphony was the great Markevitch performance that continues to thrill me today, even after acquiring several other excellent CDs of this great symphony.
My favorite is the Karajan recording from 1966! Absolutely astonishing recording, the unusual tempi, the colours and emotions….absolutely the best
No, absolutely your favorite. That has nothing to do with whether or not it's "the best."
I like his earlier 1960 recording too.
@@DavesClassicalGuide And what criteria do you follow to classify a recording as "the best"?
Yes, Svetlanov. Thank you for including the two recordings (I am unfamiliar with the live traversal in Tokyo). My admiration of his interpretation was indelibly etched even before with the last bars of the first movement of the studio recording, which turns into a whirlwind of notes.
I was reminded of the Mvarinsky stereo 4th's last movement. Such thrilling impact from both! My gut feeling is that most listener's are still unaware of the worthiness and rewards of Svetlanov in this work. Speaking of rewards, you're always giving your listener's the best in your talks - entertaining, to be sure, and much to be gained whether or not one agrees with you on particular choices of CD's.
Thank you!
I'd never heard the Monteux before right now. Wowowow! Really stunning. Thanks!
Ferenc Fricsay, with the RIAS Symphony Orchestra Berlin, 1952, brings some of the great qualities we find in his 6th Symphony. Fricsay senses how music breathes, micro pauses, and the smallest stretches and squeezes in tempo, hardly perceptible, make the music drive forward and tell a story. He brings out echoes that connect the movements together through phrasing and colour. Most of all, he knows exactly where the key moments and climaxes are. Every movement of his Pathetique has its special moment, for example in movement one, you know exactly when the recapitulation starts, whereas in most performances you think it's still the development; Fricsay slows down and goes LOUD. It's great. The second movement of the 4th is wonderful, as if a folk tale is unfolding. The scherzo and finale feel like part of the same story, all folky and at the same time forming a whole with first movement. Tchaik's friend Taneyev thought the 4th was a symphonic poem with three other movements slapped on. That's how it often feels, but that's not Tchaikovsky's fault, its the interpretation.
I would mention two recordings that i really like. It's Ladislav Slovak who recorded the symphony with the Czech Philharmonic (on Supraphon), the orchestra is stunning in this recording, they play with passion i much energy.
The second recording is with Maazel and Vienna. He really conducts the first transparent like no one conductor. And the other movements are really very beautiful played.
Maazel's cycle was brilliant - my father owned it and so did I - I wore those records out. And the 4th is the best, in my humble opinion.
An excellent survey as usual. I have almost all of these recordings of the 4th and for the most part agree with your observations. I must say that after 60+ years of listening to the 4th I return to Monteux and Boston.............and for the 5th.............and for the 6th as well.
I have just only now come to listen to the Muti recording with the Philharmonia. Agree with Dave completely.
Fully knowing that you didn't forget it David, but may I please mention the Ashkenazy/Philharmonia Tchaik 4, part of the other great 4,5,6 collection. Just love to see it mentioned here in the comments!
With your example of the return of the strings in the first movement recap, I think yours is the best performance of the 4th. Bravo!
LOVE the Abbado. Such a great find. Interesting sort of distance of the miking. Got to check out the Fischer.
Wonderful review, thank you Dave! What I have appreciated the most is the passage where you underline the influence of koussewitzky on American orchestras in relation to russian/French composers.
I like Stokowski's Tchaikovsky, but I freely admit it is not "cricket".
That Barenboim set is really something. I was in my car some years back, and I remember hearing the 5th on the radio, and thinking all along that he was doing everything just the way I wanted it to go. Just so satisfying. Then the announcer said it was Barenboim, and I was shocked. "Good for him", I thought.
Thank you for a very interesting talk on one of my favourite symphonies and I am very pleased that you chose the Mravinsky as your 'however' choice. My first recording of this was that of the RPO, conducted by Anatole Fistoulari, because it was the coupling to Fistoulari's amazing Sleeping Beauty on Eloquence. I would be interested to hear what you think of it.
I have seven of these recordings (and many others) and totally agree about the Mravinsky. What I would like to add IMHO is that Mravinsky's is also so interesting (important?) because I don't think we will ever hear this symphony played like this again no matter how good a performance and the reason is the orchestra. What an orchestra!!! It was possibly the best in Europe at the time but more than that the sound of the winds and brass, I adore it! The icing on the cake for me is the French horns, such a gorgeous sound (this applies to all the Mravinsky recordings really), I doubt we will ever hear such a sound again and it is such a pity.
Not will ever hear again a Russian orchestra and conductor recorded in London by a German record company.
Agree with you on everything...all first rate👍
Glad you included Ormandy/RCA cause it has something special that is hard to find anywhere else.
LOVE what you say about Ormandy 's humanity in the context of the thrust passion and weight he exudes from the strings specifically and the first movement's recapitulation
Wow! I'm surprised I have NOT heard many of those. Thank you very much. I have some listening to do.
Great video thank you. I just remembered a Furtwangler recording of this work with th Vienna Phil and the cymbal player was a disaster at the end!
Hei Dave, will you do a review of the new Reiner Höneck CD, Beethoven 6? I am really curious on your opinion on that one, being such an eclectic interpretation.
Of course.
I boned up on it with Markevitch as I had planned to attend an amateur orchestral concert tonight (Stockport Symphony). It was great to hear live music again (We had Joanna McGregor as soloist for Brahms 1st as first piece on the programme). One thing I liked about the Stockport Symphony was the clarity and you could hear the slight English accent on the music from this English orchestra, The brass were particularly phenomenal. Totally different experiences of course!
Markevitch was one of the great conductors. His performance of the 4th is superb.
I'm maybe in the minority here but besides the usual hysterical, bombastic classics I have a soft spot for Kurt Masur's Fourth with the Gewandhausorchester, a really good display of thinking in symphonic structures, building those climaxes inexorably but also finding ways to carefully craft inward moments too. And the one which really looks ahead keeping the last ounce of reserve power up to the final peroration, avoiding the feeling of reaching the "ceiling" too early, running out of stream for the last surge of exstatic excitement.
I agree with you. His Tchaikovsky was mostly very good.
I'm in the minority with you. For me, it's Masur or Solti when I want to hear this symphony. Masur's Pathetique is just as fine; these really show what KM was capable of, & that's emotive, exciting conducting.
Not sure how many versions Szell recorded but I have always enjoyed his 1962 recording with the LSO. I have the resissue on the Decca Historical series coupled with Beethoven's Egmont Incidental Music. The story goes that the legendary producer John Culshaw was not happy with Szell's slightly slow tempo in the last movement and told him so. This so annoyed Szell that when they recorded one final version, Szell did pick up the tempo and the result sounds almost white hot!
I’d add MTT and San Francisco to the list. I think he was trying to emphasize the yearning and nostalgic aspects of the piece. A rehearsal video makes clear that he wanted to avoid the “let’s bash the hell out of it” school. He does radically change the bowing so that the first theme begins on up bow, making the entrance somewhat tentative, not putting all the cards on the table and very consistent with his conception of the work.
thanks, I'll check Barenboim's recording out. Because of the live tv version of what I thought to be an attrocious, anti-musical Tchaikovsky's 4th on youtube, I never was interested to listen to the cd recordings. Thanks for the recommendation.
Great choices all. However, I'm a bit surprised you left out Szell's recording with the LSO. The first three movements are up to his usual standard but then the finale! I've never heard anyone do the finale like that. Maybe you'll say it's too quick. Maybe it's a bit unbalanced when compared with the less intense first movement, but it's beyond thrilling! And still in complete control!
No, actually, he's not in complete control. I find it to be just a bit below his usual standard (and so did he, by the way), which is why I left it out.
True; it is one of the best. One issue is the sound, which is not great. The second minor minus is Szells approach to be too rhytmically precise in the second movement. Besides that it is as dramatic as Svetlanov and russian school.
I enjoyed your reviews of this classic and downloaded Ivan Fischer's because I needed a good modern audiophile version since the five recordings I have were all from the 60s, 70s and 80s. It is indeed an outstanding recording and the Budapest Festival Orchestra is obviously extensively rehearsed. The sonics are spectacular, but unfortunately I did not read your comments from 2/17/2005 on your website about an audio "pulsation" on this recording (sounds like a ticking watch) before I downloaded it that unfortunately was audible (during quiet passages) through my high quality earbuds which is how I listen to music these days. Some of your other recommendations are not available to download. I have had Mravinsky's recording for many years and agree with you that the 4th Symphony is by far his best recording of the three. I heard Andre Previn conduct the L.A. Philharmonic back in the 70s take the finale almost as fast.
One that surprised me was Solti's with the CSO. Very exciting and well recording in typical decca sound. Big and bold with the glorious brass section with the strings playing their hearts out. Certain one of Solti's great achievements.
Like I said.
Solti's Tchaikovsky 4 was the first CD I ever bought. Was it 1985 or so? For me, it has that "nothing like the first time" vibe that Dave discussed a while back.
Otto Mueller famously insisted his students do the first movement in 3/4 + 3/8 for each measure. Reworked his score and everything. One former student remarked that this was "completely missing the point."
i think I might have the answer with your Muti conundrum: having observed him often with the Bavarian Radio Orchestra I noticed he did care about the sound, as he eloquently and entertainingly talked a lot about it. the operative word is TALKED. then the time came where he'd have to( being a conductor and all) SHOW it with his arm gesture. and there lies the problem. " it's the sun coming out blablabla' he said painting a great picture of the part of the celli in La mer and then the movement was like chopping meat. the musicians who were hanging from his every word, in the end ( as it always happens) responded instictively to the conductor's body /arm movement and the sound of the 'sun rising romantically so ect' sounded justy like he showed, not said: dry and uninspired.
There used to be a radio broadcast with Toscanini which was comparable to Koussevitsky's recording.
I recommend the Fedosseyev 1984 recording with the Moscow Radio Symphony, the best alternative to Mravinsky IMO. it is similar to the Abbado VPO but better....orchestral colours brilliantly elicited, and the strings you rave about in Ormandy truly sing with a wonderful Russian passion and sweep (keeping in mind you think Tchaikovsky's music is 'Italian') including in the 'recapitulation'. In the finale he doesn't try to match Mravinsky's unmatchable pace, so gets tremendous details highlighted with the bass and percussion just crashing tremendously. Very well recorded too. Found this in the local library and was very impressed.
I think it's a bore.
@@DavesClassicalGuide That terse dismissal is easy to give, and can be used against any recording. Any specific reasons?
@@HarinderJadwani Sure. I hear nothing in that recording that hasn't been done as well or better by many others, including Muti, Markevitch. Janowski, Solti, Ormandy, Maazel, Abbado (as you mentioned), etc. And the orchestra is nothing special.
I really struggle with the shrill trumpets in the Mravinsky recordings. I was kinda hoping you weren't going to include him, so I could be justified in not particularly enjoying them, given that everybody says they're the ones to get! But hey, I guess I need to hear beyond them...
Nah, it’s ok to dislike recordings no matter what other people think of them. If you want to hear beyond the trumpets, go for it! But if you can’t or would rather not, that’s awesome too.
You do. It's a particular sound, and I agree it can take some getting used to, but it depends on the sonics.
I have to agree. It is what it is but the performances can not be questioned. In comparison Abbado's 4th has the better sound and more refinement from his band.
I noticed that too but i thought of them as Sovjet army trumpets and it adds to the charme of the performance.
I love the Mravinsky 4-6, but if in your shoes, I would just skip it. It's true that sometimes one has to struggle with the material - letting go of "the pleasure principle", so to speak; but there is no reason to succumb yourself to musical masochism! Put Monteux and Boston in your cd-tray instead!
It's so funny you are doing a presentation on this right now: I have been listening to this symphony almost exclusively over the last month. My favorite treatment of the second movement is actually von Karajan's recording on Angel (from the early 70's). He does a lovely job with it: the rest of the recording is okay - I feel that there are some sound engineering issues. Von Karajan did another version on DG which isn't nearly as good. I agree with your assessment that von Karajan wasn't "passionate" about this music as he could have been, but I do like his second movement on this one particular recording. It's refreshing to hear your take on newer conductors: I have been feeling the way you do, but thought it was just because I am becoming an old grump
I was born an old grump.
Either of Karajan's DG versions are outstanding. The BPO is in top form. The best to my ears.
I heard the Fifth by Gatti a few days ago on radio and thought it was nicely frenetic.
I like the last movement with its challenging Crash Cymbal part.
Don't forget Zubin Mehta, excellent in Tchaikovsky with Los Angeles. And the last Karajan with Vienna, deep sound
it's a shame Tchaikovsky No 4 isn't being played too often in Concert hall these days
That's why I thought it's a mistake that Berlin Philharmonic didn't consider Muti as Principal Conductor. Was it because Muti was committed with La Scala or Berlin just didn't like him?
I don’t think you forget anything, Dave! You’re quite the outlier in that department.
A rather unruffled exposition of Tchaikovsky's innovative symphony. Thanks! Probably the only time that a composer completely explained his compositional methods in various letters to his benefactor (Nadeshda von Meck), to whom the symphony was dedicated...
Great overview! I just wonder why you think the sound quality of he DSO with van Zweden is bad. I own the disk and didn’t remember a bad sound. So I listened again just now and the sound is actually pretty good. Instruments are clear, dynamic range is good if not great. I’m not an audiophile person, but got a decent system (Marantz). I wonder if your CD copy is ok, otherwise I can’t understand how we could come to such different conclusions.
We hear things differently, I guess.
@@DavesClassicalGuide But we share the same enthusiasm! :)
RE: the Daniele Gatti Tchaikovsky performances. These are still available as DSD downloads, expensive but still available.
Yes, one option is a Qobuz download, at CD or high res quality.
They are also available as downloads from Presto music, at reasonable prices.
Purely for sentimental reasons (not critical ones) it is worth noting Bernstein's last Tchaikovsky Fourth Symphony recording was (as far as I know) the last time he conducted the New York Philharmonic.
Markevitch had a higher hit-to-miss ratio than almost any other conductor I can think of. So many top-notch performances, and very few duds.
Argenta with La Suisse Romande in Decca. Noble, no strings attached, it seems to be just about to fall down in several places in the first and last movement, the orchestra is not up to it. The climax of the main theme in the recapitulation of the first is top notch, as well as the "destiny" brass introducing the coda, and I love the controlled accellerando at the end, then rallentando to let the strings scream the main theme again. The ending of the Andantino is extremely sad and sensitive, when the bassoons take over the melody. I love this performance. Classic, strained, lively, with lots of contrast. I only wish he had recorded it with the LSO like he did the violin concerto.
One very beautiful and coordinated interpretation. Marvellous.
Is imposing the CD images full-screen rather than holding up the disc going to be permanent? I like it.
I like holding them up and waving them around. Sorry.
@@DavesClassicalGuide nothing to apologize for. But I’m curious why a couple of the discs were featured that way?
@@MDK2_Radio Because I didn't have them with me in Brooklyn, so I downloaded cover photos.
@@DavesClassicalGuide 👍
My two criteria for performances of this symphony come down to how conductors get through the first movement without running out of gas (perhaps one fate motive too many) and how well they handle the scherzo. Everybody I've heard on David's list passes the first test. However, Markevitch's scherzo seems too slow, even stodgy, to me. It surprised me when I heard it. Indeed, I really like Markevitch only in the first three symphonies. The last three are good, but not extraordinary like the others. As far as sets go, I'd take Markevitch in the first three, Mravinsky in the last three. I also like Szell, mostly for sentimental reasons, since he was my hometown conductor and his was my first recording of the Fourth.
Dave, I have the feeling that this is one of the most difficult comparative reviews to do. Worse than any of the Beethoven or Brahms symphonies. There are just so many recordings of this as it’s such a popular concert second half piece. I’m not going to count but I wouldn’t be surprised if I didn’t have about twenty recordings here, as it so often turns up in conductor boxes…
You did prompt me to listen to the Jurowski recording, as I was puzzled by it when I first listened. It sounds very different from the famous others as though it’s on a large chamber orchestra. Not sure what I think. But there’s a long gap between the fourth and fifth symphonies (11 years?) and maybe this is what he is trying to highlight. 11 years in the rather shorter lives of many 18th and 19th century composers is an age. So.. I will listen to the Mravinsky again I’m sure I haven’t since my teens, but the packaging of symphonies 4-6 as a sort of group, in which the Mravinsky recordings played such a role, might be encouraging misleadingly over-weighty performances of the fourth in particular. Not sure, but thanks for making me think about this!
Hola David. Veo que no tuviste en cuenta la mítica grabación de Szell con la Orquesta de Claveland. Es solo una omisión o no te parece especial esa grabación?
No es Cleveland--es Londres. No es especial.
Sanderling and Berlin Symph. Not good sonics at all, but a 4th of nobilty, singing warmth, and the usual Sanderling hallmarks
The first time I ever heard Mravinsky was in one of those conductor anthologies documentaries where they featured him conducting the closing pages of Shostakovich's Fifth. I would have liked to see the expression on my face. How can anyone completely drain the emotional content out of music like this? But, I have listened further and that is his approach. I understand that it may appeal to some. It is not what I seek in music. And my favorite Tchaikovsky's fourth is completely opposite of Mravinsky's: it's the later DG Bernstein. Definitely not the fastest Fourth out there.
Can't disagree with your recommendations...
Some other interesting ones are:
Bohm/LSO - the way he takes the first movement coda... So un-Bohm! 🙂
Dorati/LSO - granted, not as good as 1-3 but still speedy and exciting
Silvestri/Philharmonia - if you can ignore the weird Fate rhythm then it is a very fine performance
As for more modern recordings I think Pappano did a decent 4 (and 5 & 6 too)
Curious to know what you make of Hans Rosbaud, there have been a number of reissues recently which you've covered (Mahler and Sibelius I think) but not Tchai 4 & 5...
I thought that they were surprisingly good, but hardly essential.
@@DavesClassicalGuide yes, interesting indeed.
The other thing to mention about quite a lot of recordings (I think started by Karajan and then mimicked by others) was slowing up at the end of the first movement. I think Bernstein does it too. Again, not at all what Tchaikovsky wrote... It needs to be in tempo.
Forgot to say Fricsay too! Well worth a listen!
Hi Dave, I was looking for your Tchaik 5 repertoire video to prepare for listening to the new Honeck/Pittsburgh recording and I don’t think you’ve done one! I see the Ideal list and the Dave’s Fave (so I’m about to listen to the Haitink, naturally), but I don’t see a whole video on the 5th. Maybe a combo Honeck review / repertory video?
Oy, so many versions! But I will have to do it, you're right.
Why does brooding, ambitious anger in symphonies always get called "fate"?
It doesn't.
I’m surprised you didn’t mention any of Karajan’s. For me his 70’s take is one for the ages, and the one on video too. Kurt Sanderling’s is also a classic noisy and passionate as the russians can play it. The other one that recently surprised me was Gergiev with VPO.
The Karajan one from 1966 is even better. Try it.
That’s also with DG, right? I already did a while back, and still preferred the 70’s one, but I will give it a second listen ;). I think in the one from the 60s he makes the violins do that terrible pause in the tremolo of the coda xD That is a great turnoff for me. @אופק אללוף
Bohm and London Symphony Orchestra is the surprise. For the performance itself and what Bohm did. Not the best or reference one but an instesting read
Karl Bohm with Czech Philharmonic on Orfeo, check it out. For me arguably the best Tchaikovsky 4th on record but just my two cents
@@corgansow7176 sadly, I couldn't find it on stream music Qobuz. How's its style? Bohm with LSO is very improvisatory, untraditional, and weird.
@@masintec I've actually heard snippets of the LSO recording the difference between that and the Czech recording is night and day. The Czech Phil is a much more superior orchestra with the outer two movements absolutely visceral and even the quieter moments like the clarinet theme in first movement has Bohm brings out the ballet music side of Tchaikovsky that few conductors can do. You can't find it on streaming and you have to order the CD online.
Can Pletnev on DG be considered one of the worst recording of the 4th?
Probably.
"The acme of perversity!"
Oof that Ivan Fischer cover … I’m really not a fan when they try to make these conductors’ ugly mugs look like something artistic and beautiful
Well, that’s… shallow…