Customer Reviews

Beethoven: Symphony #9 Choral; Sir Simon Rattle/Vienna Philharmonic

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Three movements of insight, intelligence, suspense, beauty, feeling (especially in the beautifully executed adagio, the best since Boehm's 1980 VPO account), the right tempi and the gorgeous Vienna sound. And I already thought, this would be the one I have been waiting for since so long. Warmth, no steely sound like HVK. Finally, the perfect ninth, so I thought... But then, in the fourth movement, tragically, things go astray. No harmony, no passion, too many unccordinated individuals. Just compare to Herreweghe with La Chappelle Royale & Collegium Vocale & Orchestre de Champs Elysee on Harmonia Mundi (also on period instruments), and hear what true drama and exitement is really all about...!
The next time, Sir Simon, with the Berlin Phil, listen to the Herreweghe (or a thrilling Solti with CSO), and transfer that spirit to the best orchestra in the world and let us marvel in the choral finale as well, please, please...!

I purchased this 9th separately from the rest of Rattle's VPO Beethoven cycle based on many reviews I've read and most reviewers had good things to say about the 9th so I thought I would give it a try. First, let me say this is an excellent recording, the VPO sounds outstanding as they should, the Birmingham chorus is nothing short of remarkable, and the quartet of soloists is very good (if a bit recessed in the recording). Rattle uses the del Mar edition and there is much to enjoy here, especially the wonderful accents in the choral section and several amazingly powerful crescendos throughout. I have one major complaint that keeps this from being my top recommendation and that is the simply bizarre point in the finale toward the very end of the symphony where Rattle almosts silences the chorus for several seconds to let us hear the piccolo part loud and clear. It is not clear why Rattle chooses to do this as it adds nothing to the picture at that point and I feel distracts strongly from the overall sound structure going on at that moment. The piccolo playing fortissimo continues until the end unfortunately and it is a pity this mars an otherwise top choice recording.

As others have mentioned, this may be the best rendition of the 9th Symphony done with modern recording. The sound quality is excellent, making the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra and City of Birmingham Symphony Chorus sound wonderful. I think Sir Simon Rattle's interpretation and presentation of the 9th Symphony is second to none, though, obviously, no conductor would perfectly match everything I would prefer. I find his reading of the 9th most satisfying.

I differ from the other reviewers here in that I actually prefer how he highlighted the piccolo at the end of the piece. I thought it complemented the soprano part and, together with the soprano, chorus, and orchestra, achieved a climax in tone and emotional intensity at the end that is superior to any other recording I have heard - and more satisfying. In any case, I highly recommend this rendition; definitely no one will be disappointed in the purchase.

I might caution that Sir Simon Rattle was not uniformly good on all the other Beethoven Symphonies; no complete set from any conductor is great on all the symphonies. I was particularly disappointed with the 7th, though he did very well on the 1st and some others.

Simon Rattle and Claudio Abbado released competing sets of the Beethoven symphonies from Vienna and Berlin respectively. Both were major events, and both, we are told, represent a rethink of performing traditions. I thought it would be intriguing to compare the two in the Ninth Symphonny to see how the new thinking paid off.

Since I'm going into detail, let me synopsize first: Rattle keeps much closer to tradition than Abbado, who incorporates a dose of period-performance style. Both readings have their strong and weak points. One's choice may eventually depend on which conductor appeals to you more, not the intrinsic quality of their versions.

Rattle: The first thing to nte is the thin, recessed sound, which somehow turns the wonderful acoustics of the Musikverein into a dry box. To get any kind of impact the volume must be turned up considerably, and fortunately it can take it--loud passages don't get glassy and hard. At 16:55 min., Rattle's first movement is a minute slower than Karajan's famous 1963 recording, so he's not adhering to the fashion for much faster speeds in Beethoven--not so far, at least. There's a palpable sense of mystery here that's tremendously effective, and Rattle uses the braid pace for high drama, contrasting whispered detail with thunderous climaxes (the bad sonics don't allow these to register as they should, however).

The Scherzo, at 11:59 min., is a minute slower than Karajan's timing, reinforcing the notion that Rattle's interpretation clings to the old more than it explores the new. He imparts exuberance and vibrancy in this movement, which could hardly be better. The sublime Adagio, at 17 min., adds a minute to Karajan's timing and is cnducted with such depth of emotion that one can be sure that Rattle is placing himself in the great Romantic tradition--he shapes each bar even more than Karajan or Furtwangler, in fact.

His finale times out within seconds of Karajan's at 23+ min., and although Rattle goes for somewhat sharper angles, the opening follows tradition in eveyr way--I especially like that Rattle is so free in stating the recitative-like passages, making them sound as if they wre invented on the spot. This music is strugglng to find its shape from primordial stuff. Excellent as Thomas Hampson is, his entry reveals a baritone voice struggling with a bass role--the sudden addition of embelishments comes as a surprise but is refreshing.

The rest of the quartet is a bit rough in ensemble, and each voice is too light for the part. The Birmingham chorus, which sounds sizable and a little amateurish, has been enoucraged to add punchy accents that are unfamiliar--perhaps the new del Mar edition indicates them. It takes a while to get used to such explosive singing, which sometimes becomes too militant rather than joyful. Rattle suddenly indulges in extreme tempo shifts, also. That's a shame, because up to this point, Rattle had produced one of the finest traditional reading in many years, full of musical invention.

Abbado: Whereas Rattle had avoided Beethoven before producing his complete cycle, Abbado had a cycle to his credit form the Seventies with the Vienna Phil, as well as a live Ninth from Berlin, but all had struck me as dull and uninvolving. His rethink motivated him to speed up, reduce the size of the orchestra, and reduce the vibrato in keeping with period style. He is not as aggressive about this as Harnoncourt, however, who also used a modern orchestra with period touches.

The spirit of the new enters immediately in a fast, energized first movement that eschews mystery in favor of kinetic power. At 14 min. it's more than two minutes faster than Rattle, but it feels like more. Abbado Scherzo times out at 13 min. without being slower than Rattle's--perhaps there's an extra repeat I didn't catch. Here he runs out of energy a bit and doesn't deliver quite the vitality in Rattle's version. Abbado tries for a touch of delicacy that doesn't quite suit the Scherzo's rollicking robustness.

It needs saying that DG's sonics, while a touch better than EMI's in Vienna, are nothing special, being too constrained and limited in impact--the latest remastering of Karajan's 1963 cycle far surpasses it.

Abbado's Adagio, at 12+ min., is radically faster than either Rattle or Karajan. This isn't necessarily a period feature; Klemperer also heard this movement faster than usual. In terms of phrasing, Abbado remains traditional. Nothing here sounds radical; it's Romanticism in a hurry. Abbado's finale, at 22+ min., cuts two minutes off rattle's timing, but it's well within traditional limits, and one hears almost no period otuches except for a lack of vibrato when the cellos and basses introduce the famous theme.

Abbado's besetting flaw in his earlier Beethoven was a lack of dramatic involvement. The finale here feels a bit that way, too, and things aren't helped by the distant, anemic miking. One's spirits are lifted by Thomas quasthoff's superlative declamation of the bass solo, and the Eric Ericosn Chamber Choir--smaller than the Birmighma and made up of professional singers--is clear, strong, and emotional. The solo quartet belnds beautifully and sings in tune. Once we reach the body of the finale, Abbado has found more energy. He doesn't realy approach the heaven-storming passison of Toscanini or the depth of Furtwangler, but his account feels stronger and more natural than Abbado's--this movement is the high point of his recording.

How, then, to compare the two? I wound up being confused, since I liked Rattle so much in the first three movemetns but felt badly let down in the finale. Abbado is more consistent, and he has a somewhat newer, if not revolutionary, view of the Ninth. Neither CD sounds very good, yet in the current market, they are both worth a close listen. I wish I could jump and shout for either one, but I can't.