Beethoven Symphonies - best perf + sonics on CD

This is the DG remaster, correct?

http://www.amazon.com/Beethoven-The-Symphonies-Gundula-Janowitz/dp/B0000C03AH

Goofyfoot...I wish I knew about Furtwängler on Orfeo D'Or before I purchased the EMI separates. thanks for the info.

Shall we do Brahms next?

Good idea :-)

Symphony No. 1, which happens to be my favorite symphony:

For performance + sonics: Horenstein/LSO, Chesky CD19

For performance: Toscanini/NBC Symphony Orchestra (1940 performance), transcribed from Victor 78s

I've downloaded the latter from the link shown, as an MP3, transcribed it to a redbook CD-R, and played it on my main system. The primitive but surprisingly listenable sound did not detract significantly from what to me is a performance for the ages.

Note that it can also be played directly from the website to your computer.

IMHO. Best regards,

-- Al

Lowrider, complete with a descriptive review of the entire set;

http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=102270

Lowrider, I have the Giulini/VPO Brahms you mentioned. It is wonderful. I also agree on the price for the Japanese imports, although I may pull the trigger on the Kempe/Strauss reissues when they are available. No one can touch Kempe on Strauss imo.
Almaarg, I also admire the Toscanini Brahms. I haven't listened to his 1st in a while. I will put that on my playlist.

I'll just throw this out there;

Immortal Performances RCA Victrola (re-pressings of the red seal deluxe edition) Toscanini and the NBC Symphony Orchestra Brahms: The Four Symphonies and "Haydn" Variations, Tragic Overture, Academic Festival Overture.

Library of Congress Card Number R67-3745

These sound better for some reason than any of the other original pressings of Toscanini Brahms on RCA.

Almarg's post reminded me of the Chesky series of Beethoven;
Rene Leibowitz/Royal Philharmonic. These were recorded in 1960 and have superb sound thanks to Chesky's tube-based remastering system.
Terrific performances with the most analogue sound I've ever heard on a CD. Very detailed, great soundstaging, and with the ambiance of being seated in the concert hall.
(but more expensive than mass-produced disks, which is understandable).

Al, Have you heard the Toscanini 1952 (NBCSO) recording of the 2nd? It is aural seratonin with just a dash of dopamine. Pure joy!

Brownsfan, no I haven't heard it, but it's now on my to be acquired list. Thanks!

Best regards,
-- Al

Al, http://www.amazon.com/Brahms-Four-Symphonies-Symphony-Orchestra/dp/B00000JPCE/ref=sr_1_4?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1361549900&sr=1-4
All 4 Brahms symphonies for ~ $20. Digitally remastered. The 2nd is the one that really stands out here. I think it is my favorite Brahms 2. Sound is about as good as you can expect for that era.

Can anyone recommend one of the Japanese re-masters or validate its quality based on price comparison? Speaking of von Karajan, I've been cogitating over the Sibelius 2nd and Finlandia but for $80.00?

http://store.acousticsounds.com/d/80474/Herbert_von_Karajan-Sibelius_Symphony_No_2-Hybrid_Stereo_SACD

I have the '63 von Karajan 9 Symphonies Remastered which is much better in sound quality than the earlier '63 set. I also have the entire Furtwanger Berlin set, plus a few choice individual ones from '53 (Vienna)...each carefully remsastered by specialist archival guys in France, Tahra, as well as Orfeo, Audite. They are great interpretations for me...but the sound quality is still lacking compared to great recordings/masterings. I also have the Harnoncourt set...the 9th is something else...very rich and romantic if you want a sweeping 9th...quite a lot of fun. my two cents.

Goofyfoot, I have so far just refused to pay that kind of money. Although, as I said earler, I have heard they are working on the Klempe SDO recordings of the Strauss tone poems. I will almost certainly give 1 or 2 of those a try.
BTW, I really like the Ashkenazy Sibelius 2 on Exton, and it comes with the most lovely recording of the Swans of Tuenalla(sp) I have yet heard. Its a rare month where that disk doesn't get a couple of playings.

Loydelee21, I had that Harnoncourt cycle with the Chamber Orchestra of Europe and thought the 9th to be the best of them. Yes, Orfeo, Audite, and more rarely mentioned Andante which was one of my favorites before they stopped production, too bad. I'm now looking at a Kreisler Japanese re-master that plays back at 192 kHz and since my DAC will match that frequency I'm certain to order it come payday.
Do you know if the Japanese re-masdters in general playback at this frequency of 192 kHz?

I am considering the 1963 Karajan set on SACD. It's $72 on Amazon. But then, SACD did not do much for the 1954 9th by Furtwangler. I tired to listen to it last night but could not. It may be best, just to pick and choose the best recordings of each seperate symphony. I buy some recordings that are of histroic importance, just to have them. Never listen to them.

Cheers

Brownsfan, A priority reason that I'm thinking of the Japanese re-masters is to to test my stereo. I don't own a SACD player but that's OK.
Ashkenazy: Strauss Ein AlpenSinfonie on Ondine has been on my list for a while. He is certainly a very capable conductor though pianist comes to my mind first and foremost.

Brownsfan, thanks very much once again. I have it on order!

Best regards,
-- Al

There is something a bit surprising in the Brahms recommendations coming in. Did you notice? Bohm, Giulini, Toscanini, Toscanini, Toscanini, and another vote for Giulini. One German conductor for the most quintessentially German music ever written.

Al, I am listening to the 1940 Toscanini NBCSO. It is quite remarkable. This is well worth hearing, and much better than his 1952 effort on the 1st.

There are alot of great recommendations and comments here. I also like to see Bob Greenberg's set mentioned - I know him personally, and have always wholeheartedly recommended his series to "laymen" who are interested in learning more about classical music. For the more advanced musical students, they are a little simplistic, but his "word-score" concept is a fantastic way of explaining the basics to non-musicians. There isn't anything better out there, though I also love to recommend the famous composer Aaron Copland's book, What To Listen For In Music.

For me, the 40's/50's way of doing Beethoven is very slow and overly romanticized, though the best of them do make it work musically. Of all the older sets mentioned, I would prefer the Bohm, though he is not normally a conductor I would choose. That Beethoven set is in my opinion his very finest work. Another old set which I am very surprised at the lack of mention here, though, is the Szell/Cleveland set. While I don't always like his tempi, there is some very fine playing in that set by the Cleveland Orchestra.

Of the more modern conductors, by miles the best original instrument set is Gardiner's, which has been mentioned several times already. I am also a big fan of Claudio Abbado - those DVD's he did in 2001 with Berlin are absolutely amazing - Beethoven as it should be done on modern instruments. Incredible interpretations and performances, which always trumps sound quality IMO.

For Brahms, I also really enjoy Abbado's old set from the 70's, which was done with a different orchestra for each symphony, which is kind of interesting in itself. Also, the Szell/Cleveland set here is still considered by many musicians to be the gold standard. I wasn't going to be negative, but I cannot resist adding that I am generally not a fan of Toscanini for the German rep - the younger Italians, Abbado and Giulini do it MUCH better. I actually have never heard the Giulini Brahms set you guys have mentioned, I will have to try to find that on LP.

By the way, someone made the comment that the faster tempos were "how the early music people think they were played at the time," or something like that. This is now beyond question, with all the research that has been done in the last twenty years or so. Beethoven's metronome was indeed just fine, and he really did intend for the tempos to be that quick. And in Haydn and Mozart's time, tempi were often even quicker for Allegros, etc. Also, one of my personal pet peeves is how slow many conductors influenced by the greats of the 40's and 50's take Andantes. Andantes are supposed to be good walking tempos, as Gardiner and Abbado and others take them. And they definitely were so in the 18th century. OK, I'll get off my soapbox now.

Learsfool, I'm not sure that I agree with anything that you've said (ha, ha) all the same. Andante put out a nice Brahms set which contains Toscanini 1941, Walter 1936, Stokowski 1936, Mengelberg 1932, Monteux 1945, Sabata 1939, Furtwängler 1945, Weingartner 1938.

Learsfool, The next time you see Greensburg tell him thanks for me. My last formal music class was 1966 8th grade music. I have the vast majority of his courses, and several of them I have been through at least twice. I'm working my way through the Mozart chamber set now. As usual, he has opened my ears to some gems I was not familiar with.

On the Brahms , I admire much of what Abbado has done but I haven't heard his Brahms. i will check this out and probably the Szell also. I also would love to hear Welser-Most and the Clevelanders do a cycle. I heard them do the Violin Concerto with Zimmerman several years back and found it to be mighty fine Brahms.

I found the 1940 Toscanini Brahms to be very un-Toscanini like. Very Teutonic. Had I heard it without knowing i would never have guessed it was him.

On the Beethoven, the Gardiner set is a great one and it does get played, especially the 2nd. But you know, I just can't make the historically informed/original instrument approach my base camp. Its worthwhile, informative, enjoyable, but it speaks to my mind. Not my heart.

At this point in time, I find that Baroque and earlier music sounds better to my ear and simply more "right" when played on period instruments and with the prevailing scholastic ideas applied. Classic era music I like either way. By around Beethoven and beyond I prefer modern instruments.

Tempo is an area requiring pretty deep discussion. But I guess we have the time or we wouldn't be here!

I tend to believe that tempo markings are primarily dependent upon the overall aesthetic of the work. Back in the day of course, conductors had to speed up tempos in order to fit works onto a recording. This was a serious handicap with cylinders and 78's. Brahms is well known for writing in tempos like, 'fast but not too fast and certainly not slow'. What it comes down to I think is that neither Beethoven nor Brahms would expect tempos to be exactly the same between any one performance. Composers throughout time have understood personal interpretations of their scores as being part of the artistic process. I'd even be as bold as to say that there was more freedom given with respect to interpretation during these afore mentioned composers lifetimes than there is today. At the top of my head I am thinking of the Percy Granger Grieg Piano Concerto on 2L (a very interesting approach to using a piano roll).

Learsfool, thanks for bringing your very extensive knowledge and expertise to this thread. If you get a chance, do try to listen to Toscanini's 1940 Brahms 1st recording, via the link I provided above.

Returning to Beethoven, I'm surprised that no one has yet mentioned the 1958 Bruno Walter/Columbia Symphony "Pastorale."

I have it on LP, on an imported Japanese CBS/Sony remaster, I believe from the 1980s, which has very respectable if not great sonics. It appears to be readily available these days on various CDs, although I have no idea what their sonic quality may be.

It is considered by many to be the definitive interpretation of this beautiful work.

Best regards,
-- Al

"Beethoven's metronome was indeed just fine, and he really did intend for the tempos to be that quick."

I would agree and being a student of Haydn, Beethoven's early symphonies would probably be at a similar quick tempo.

Lowrider, I'm not so sure that Haydn had that much of an influence on Beethoven. His study with Haydn was financed by a benefactor. From my understanding this arrangement mostly served to set Beethoven up in Vienna from Beethoven's point of view.

Indirectly, I suspect Bach had more influence on Beethoven than Haydn did.
I am sympathetic to the argument that a great deal of flexibility in tempi was expected. Otherwise, how does one explain Brahms' bizarre attempts at explaining what he wanted in Italian. Mahler I think took a better course and used his native German. I understand his scores leave little doubt regarding his intentions.

Can somebody point me toward the best sounding remasters of Toscanini(Redbook)? I'm looking to try out a few single releases, not a box set.

A point well taken Brownsfan, but I can hear a lot of Haydn in Beethoven's 1 and 2.

Hello gentlemen (apologies to any ladies reading, but none of you have posted in this particular thread, if memory serves).

Goofyfoot - of course, tempi are meant to be flexible - the vast majority of music is almost never metronomic all the way through. Tempo markings are basic guidelines. That said, each has its generally acceptable range, and there are still a great many conductors who fall out of this range for the Andante marking specifically, especially in Classical era music, but also some Romantic music as well. The guys in the 40's and 50's tend to do this. If you like that, fine, many people do. And some of those composers do make those slower tempi work. This, however, is a very difficult thing to do, in very large part because it goes against the grain of the composer's assumptions/intentions. I personally think it is a very unfortunate thing that those type of interpretations prevailed in what was the so-called Golden Age of classical music recordings in the 50's and 60's.

Another clarification I want to make - I do not necessarily prefer original instruments, even for Baroque music. I am fascinated by them, and have many times considered taking up the natural horn, but have never pulled the trigger. However, I believe it is possible to perform 18th century works just fine on modern instruments. You just need to reduce the size of the orchestra and play in a lighter style, and the correct style/tempi is a big part of it too.

There are two very large schools of thought on performing/interpreting the works of the great composers of the past (with of course many subdivisions of both). One is that one should always remain faithful to what are obviously the composer's artistic intentions (original instrument groups would be an extreme of this school). The other would be those who think that the masterworks must be kept "fresh" or "current" by re-inventing the wheel with them, musically-speaking, the attention being then much more centered on the performer than the composer. A great many soloists have this latter approach, often making a mockery of what is actually on the page. Of course, many Romantic showpieces are supposed to be done this way, within reason, so I'm not really talking about that. But there are many conductors that think they have to put their personal stamp on a masterwork by doing something strange or unusual or original, even if it doesn't actually make any sense and is obviously contrary to the composer's markings.

It should be pretty obvious that I am generally in the former camp. There is plenty of room for individual expression within the great masterworks without resorting to wholesale changes. As a performer, I always try to keep the composer's intention uppermost.

That said, there are also cases where the composer's markings are routinely changed because something else works better. This is often the case, for instance, in the works of Paul Hindemith. Generally speaking, his metronome marking suggestions are incredibly slow, and almost everyone, himself included, actually went quite a bit faster in many cases. Another example - in the 18th century, there aren't very many expressive markings at all in the scores. Even fundamental things like dynamics and articulation are often left up to the performer, again within reason, and assuming you are staying within certain stylistic guidelines.

And yes, Beethoven was very heavily influenced by Haydn. Not necessarily the actual lessons he had with him, those were largely unproductive, but through the study of his scores and the playing through and performing of his music. For those of you with a better knowledge of music, one of the best books I have ever read is by the very recently deceased pianist/scholar Charles Rosen, called The Classical Style, I believe. Unfortunately, it does require a basic knowledge of music theory to follow the discussions - it is not really a book for the layman. But if you have some basic knowledge of music theory, I highly recommend it. OK, I'll shut up now.

Learsfoot, you are right on the mark here and I wouldn't try refuting anything which you've just said. Keep in mind as well while concerning performance practice that Vienna was the mecca for music because composers, conductors, musicians, etc.... were in constant contact with one another and together they invented what is now the Viennese School. The point here is that more performance practice has been handed down by word of mouth than usually realized. Hence study with a great conductor, then use that lens of perspective when pulling briefs off of the library shelves.
With the invention of electronic communications, these sources of information travelled further and faster so that Bartok was able to record Hungarian folk melodies which in a way negates the need for him to notate anything. The practice of improvisation varied greatly in the jazz world and very little of it was written in a formal sense. So you bring up several good points but the one that speaks to me the most (besides Hindemith) is that many conductors from the golden era tended to follow in lock step with one another regarding tempo. I really find this to be unquestionable however as we take a distance from what was going on then, it's clear to acknowledge the overall impact that both recordings and film had on the practices of the time and I wouldn't hesitate to assume that the record companies had as much of an influence on the outcomes as did the artists themselves. I'm not suggesting that conductors were being compromised but if Mahler suggested to Walter to shave off two minutes from a scherzo to achieve a particular quality and it became effective, then consumers of that recording began to set trends. Lastly, composers, conductors and musicians are influenced by popular recordings just as any other fan would be. Would you not say that this point of view would then explain some of the mentioned commonalities and conformities of the past?

Learsfool, I agree--there is usually some gray area regarding tempo (without betraying the original intent). Also agreement regarding Haydn influence on LVB and that the Rosen book is worth checking out. Thanks for the good post.

For the record, one can hear Hummel and Clementi as well in Beethoven, but he never studied with them (well, that I know of).

Hi Goofyfoot - my first thought about your post is to say that to a musician, the fact of performance practices being handed down from teacher to student goes without saying, though I guess that is maybe not so obvious to a layman, so it is good you point it out. However, one caveat with it - you remember the elementary school exercise where the teacher whispers a sentence to one student, who in turn whispers it to the next, etc., and even if it is a relatively small number of students, the last one who speaks the sentence aloud finds that it is often completely different from what the teacher had said in the first place? This most definitely applies to this conversation.

And it's interesting that you use the Walter/Mahler example - many felt at the time that Walter did not take the same tempos as Mahler, that others interpreted his music quite a bit better (Richard Strauss, for instance, even though he didn't particularly care for Mahler's music), and I personally have never found Walter's recorded Mahler interpretations to be particularly good, either. Those were done, of course, long after Mahler's death, and even longer after the two actually worked together. Just because someone knew someone very well and worked with him does not necessarily mean that they actually do things the same way, even if they think they do. Some musicians, however, do really like Walter's recorded Mahler interpretations quite a bit.

Mahler himself was quite famous for making alterations to Beethoven's scores, to account for the increased size of string sections and the differences already occurring in the instruments themselves. Now, however, brass instruments in particular are even bigger and heavier than in Mahler's day, and there is actually starting to be a reaction against this now - many younger brass professionals are switching to smaller, lighter instruments, though they still play them much louder in general than even fifty years ago.

Another very important thing to note about the development of conductors - in the old days, they all learned in opera houses that existed in basically every German town. I think there were almost 70 opera houses in Germany in the days when Strauss, Mahler, Walter, Szell, Furtwangler and all those other guys were coming up. There were plenty of places for them to learn their trade and experiment. Young conductors today simply do not have this available to them, even in Europe. Young conductors hardly ever get to be front of an orchestra and actually practice conducting. The loss of all these different opera houses and orchestras that used to exist has had a huge effect on the training and experience a young conductor can receive now as opposed to them. This accounts for the general decline in the level of many young conductors. There are still some coming up, but in general there has been a huge decline in the number of "world class" conductors.

As to your comments on the recording industry, yes it has totally changed how music is learned and raised the standards of live performance to almost ridiculous levels. It is a very telling fact that Strauss and others who were around at the beginning of the sound recording era actually hated the idea. Recordings have really driven the quest for technical perfection in performance to ridiculous levels - kids coming out of the top music schools nowadays are absurdly good players of their instruments, even more so than when I was in school in the late 80's/early 90s. However, there has been a corresponding decline in their knowledge of other aspects of music besides the technical playing of their instrument. They can play anything, but meanwhile everyone is starting to sound more and more the same, and regional differences in sound are beginning to disappear. It is a very sad thing.

And as for the recording process itself - audiophiles do not like to hear this, but it really is true that the musicians and conductors have almost zero control anymore over that process. With the digital technology they have now, and the ability to edit pretty much anything they want however they want, recordings are almost completely "fake" now, especially if we are talking about electronically produced popular music. But even in the classical world, I have participated in recording sessions where take after take was done that sounded like dog crap. However, the extremely heavily edited final product sounds just fine, though it bears almost no resemblance to what actually happened. All commercial recording is like this now. It bears almost zero resemblance to reality. About the only recordings that are close to "real" in this sense are the live radio broadcasts that orchestras do. Though even these, unless they are truly being aired live as the performance is happening, are often chosen from all the performances of the concert in question. I happen to serve on the musician committee that helps determine what is broadcast from our classical concerts in my orchestra. It might be the overture from Saturday, the first two movements of the concerto from Sunday but the last movement from Saturday, etc. That's about as close to "live" as you can get nowadays, unless you know you are listening to an actual live broadcast. OK, I have once again posted way more than I meant too, so I'll shut up now.

Thanks Learsfool, you have a more expansive knowledge about music history then I do, though I do have a liberal arts education in music. I hear a lot of music in Cincinnati (for it being a small city) and seeing that my grandparents were affiliated with the Cincinnati College of Music, I feel a natural attachment to the College Conservatory of Music at the University of Cincinnati. I graduated from the College of Design, Architecture, Art and Planning, at the University of Cincinnati and as a visual artist, I bridge the various arts disciplines in aesthetic terms. Though we come from different professions, we probably share more similarities than we do differences. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to share and learn.

Goofyfoot...wow a lots happened on this thread in the last couple of days! sorry - i do not know much about the Japanese and 192khz question you asked. apologies.

However, if you do find out...please let us know! Very interested.

And yes, generally with the other person who posted about the Furtwanger Tahra SACD...probably better than earlier remasterings...but 'it is what it is'.

Hi Tostadosunidos - love that moniker, by the way - yes, I would agree with the Hummel/Clementi influences, too, though this would come more from performing their music than actual compositional ideas - Beethoven was far better than either of them as a writer, for sure.

Goofyfoot - that's an interesting background. Cincinnati has a very good orchestra, I assume you attend their concerts regularly. I have been reading a fair amount about aesthetics lately myself. I took a couple of art history courses in college, but my interests outside of music tend more to drama and literature in general, poetry as well. As you can guess from my moniker, Shakespeare has been a big study of mine.

Learsfool, I've often seen the CSO, especially when Paavo Jarvi was director. I studied a bit of set design at CCM so I gravitate towards the theatre in that way. Also, my late Aunt Marcia Lewis did Broadway shows in NYC from the early 1960's until her final run as Mama Morton in Chicago. She played beside Bebe Neuwirth in that cast.

Lowrider, I can't offer an opinion on the best sounding Toscanini. What I can tell you is that the RCA red seals I have of the Beethoven and Brahms symphonies are pretty decent. They have been remastered and are much better than the same recordings (vinyl) I had in the late 60's early 70's. You can get the 9 Beethoven symphonies for about $20 on Amazon now. That might be a good place to start. I don't own any of the Testament recordings or EMI's.

thanks, Brownsfan... the reviewers on Amazon are also recommending the Red Seal. And since you are a gentleman and a scholar, I'll go for it.

I had the 4th, 5th and 6th symphonies of Tchaikovsky on CD by DG. One of the pieces (I confess that I can't remember which one now) sounded like the trumpets were recorded in a studio and poorly mixed in. It just sounded unnatural and improperly balanced. Despite Ted Libbey recommending this CD, I was more than happy to give it away and find something else.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who didn't like a DG CD.

Lowrider, Brownsfan, I dare make mention of Josef Krips. Though not in anyway a household name such as von Karajan, a very intelligent and musical conductor. Of course it would be impossible to name everyone but he made some outstanding recordings. WWII was without question the cause for his tumultuous career. Any comments?

Goofyfoot, Krips---wow, that is a name I haven;t heard for years! Back in the day, I remember having had one Krips recording. I think it may have been Schubert. That is the sum total of my experience and memory. Too many tumbleweeds in the great synaptic expanse, I fear.

Brownsfan, to refresh your memory, Josef Krips studied with Felix Weingartner in Vienna and became principle conductor of the Vienna Philharmonic before he was exiled out of Austria.
I'm guessing that may have been around 1948 when that Krips Schubert symphony was recorded. Also, the unfinished Mozart Requiem is beautiful, possibly my favorite. His Don Giovanni with the Vienna Philharmonic and Vienna State Opera Orchestra is possibly thought to be his greatest recording achievement. Cesare Siepe is Don Giovanni and a young Lisa Della Casa plays Donna Elvira.

Now I am very curious about that Krips Don Giovanni recording. Krips is an interesting conductor. I have Siepe singing the Don on the Leinsdorf recording, which is nice, and I also like that they recorded all of the opera, even the numbers that are almost always cut in the last act. The best Don Giovanni, though, is Giulini's. Absolutely fantastic, as is his Figaro. By the way, the Vienna Philharmonic and the Vienna State Opera Orchestra are one and the same ensemble - always have been.

Learsfool, I apologize but I made an error, I meant to say the Vienna State Opera Chorus. I have the Josef Krips, Don Giovanni on vinyl. It's an 8 sided London mono box set which was given to me. I just wish that I had a better mono cartridge since all of the vinyl that I own is in mono. The other complete Don Giovanni that I have is the Glyndebourne Festival Opera Company with Fritz Busch as conductor on RCA Victor but admittedly its condition is somewhat sketchy so it sits in the misfit bin. I would certainly recommend the Josef Krips recording. I have a Rene Jacobs Le Nozze di Figaro on Harmonia Mundi which is a period performance and I would way recommend that also.

Hi Goofyfoot - I used to have a copy of that Glyndebourne one, but I didn't care for it as much as those others I mentioned, so I sold it. Haven't heard the Rene Jacobs. For the period instrument Mozart, I really like Gardiner, though I think I only have a copy of his Magic Flute, not any of the other operas.

Learsfool,
the Rene Jacobs operas are excellent and they feature the Concerto Köln in cooperation with WDR 3. There is also a 'Saul' by Georg Friedrich Haedel and it's superb. The Don Giovanni is with the Freiburg Baroque Orchestra and it's also available on Blue Ray or DVD. If my memory doesn't fail me, they were all recorded live for radio broadcast.

http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/albumList.jsp?name_id1=8429&name_role1=1&name_id2=13576&name_role2=3&bcorder=31

Honestly, I couldn't give you a higher recommendation from my collection than the Rene Jacobs recordings.They may not be to everyones taste but the quality of these discs are irrefutable. As for the Krips Don Giovanni, it's of course a classic. I don't own the Decca CD,

http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=213511

I've not heard the Gardiner but his Figaro DVD looks enticing.

Lowrider, Goofyfoot, and all interested in the remastered 63 von Karajan set.
It arrived today, and I started off with the 7th and 8th, both of which I owned and loved on vinyl, then went to the 1st and 2nd. In terms of the sound, it is well, a bit of a mixed bag. You get the nice ambience of the Jesus Christus Kirche, and the upper strings are fairly sweet. The lower strings tend to be a bit muddy at times, and the tympani lacks the sharp attack and proper decay for which one might hope. You will not be fooled into thinking this is a 2013 Linn release.
BUT---its HvK in his prime. The 7th and 8th are even better than I had remembered. His approach on the 1st is a little to much Haydn and too little LvB for my taste, but still worthwhile. I remember Lennie Bernstein's remark "This is no minueto!" and I think he was dead right.
Back in the day I owned the LvB 3rd, 5th, 6 th, 7th, 8th and 9th from the 63 HvK cycle. This may be enough of a teaser to get me to try one of the Japanese remasters.

Back to Beethoven - I am about halfway through watching those DVDs I mentioned of Claudio Abbado conducting the Berlin Phil in Rome in 2001. Unbelievable performances - if you have never heard them, you owe it to yourself to do so. Beethoven as it should be played.

Thanks Brownsfan, I'm glad you shared. Yes, the Japanese like raising the bar. I even saw a Japanese remaster of a CD just originally released in 2007, Keith Jarrett's 'Inside Out' and it's on ECM. In actuality 1963 was a pretty long time ago and stereo recordings were just gaining popularity even though the first stereo taping was recorded in 1943 ( of the Cincinnati ).
Do you happen to know if these stereo recordings were recorded side by side in mono? If so, it would be interesting to compare the two that way. Nevertheless, you've got yourself audible copies of some of the best von Karajan recordings. I would also like to hear your take on a Japanese remaster, maybe the 'Eroica'? Happy listening!

Goofyfoot, I would probably be most likely to spring the money for the 7th, although I had a deep love for HVKs 3rd as well. I would take them one at a time, depending on how they sound.
The best I can describe the DG remasters is like when you first began to think about getting a replacement stylus. There is substantial grunge in the sound. There is definitely room for improvement. The sound quality was quite uniform in the symphonies I heard last night.