The very best Sibelius recordings in analog


Jean Sibelius, the great Finnish composer, wrote magnificent symphonies. We are celebrating Finland´s 100th Anniversary and Sibelius´ music as well.
Please tell your favorite analog recordings of his best work, I really would appreciate.
  
One of mine is the Lorin Maazel ´s 60´s symphonies on Decca label. 
Sibelius reputation rests chiefly on his great symphonies, seven spectacular creations, all with their particular points of grandeur and originality.

Originally released between 1963 and 1968 Maazel´ s Sibelius cycle met with critical acclaim. Particularly praised is Maazel´s interpretation of the Fourth Symphony in the Vienna Philharmonics only recording of the work.

harold-not-the-barrel

Showing 3 responses by frogman

Some excellent recommendations.  I especially like the Maazel recommendation by the OP.  I am typically not a fan of Maazel's interpretations and conducting style, but his Sibelius cycle (first ever stereo Sibelius recordings, btw) is wonderful with my favorite orchestra the Vienna Phil.  Recordings not mentioned and which in my opinion are particularly interesting are the early (early 1930's) recordings by Robert Kajanus and the London Symphony.  Kajanus was a composer/conductor and close friend of Sibelius and these recordings are probably the closest thing to the composer's own vision for these works.  Although reissued on lp in the 70's I have only been able to find the cd versions.  These analog (obviously) recordings are not audiophile material but give a particularly interesting and beautiful view of this wonderful music.
Schubert, I'll be sure to check out the Vanska/Minnesota recordings.  I generally find something special about conductors' interpretations of the music of compatriots.  Vanska has without a doubt elevated the Minnesota to a very high level; he is a very fine musician.  I don't know how much playing he is doing currently, but he is also a very fine clarinetist.  Btw, I agree with your (disappearing) comments about Maazel;  all the more reason that I found his Sibelius recordings such a pleasant surprise.  I played under Maazel a few times over the years and I can tell you that he was a remarkable technician with an almost incredible ability to conduct complex meters with great clarity; but, often cold and machine like.  He would micro manage beat patterns with unnecessary subdivisions as if to say "look what I can do with a baton"; while seeming to lose sight of the big picture.  Still, good Sibelius.
I strongly agree with Schubert’s premise re the connection between the spoken language of a culture and its music and music making. This is something that is well documented and analyzed in musicology. Of course (and only as one example) an American conductor can bring certain interpretative elements to Russian music that render it great or even "perfect" to a given listener. However, there is no doubt in my mind that in many cases (not all, obviously) a Russian (again, only as an example) conductor can sometimes bring something to the music that eludes conductors who don’t have the depth of understanding of the culture and language that the Russian conductor might. Just two examples based on personal experience (for whatever it may worth):

As an orchestral saxophonist I have played Mussorgsky’s (Ravel) "Pictures At An Exibition" and Rachmaninov’s "Symphonic Dances" more times than I can remember; including the Rachmaninov with the American orchestra that the work was written for and who premiered it. There have been several fine and memorable performances of the two works. However, it wasn’t until I had the privilege of playing "Pictures" under Gergiev and "Symphonic Dances" with the St. Petersburg under Temirkanov that I "got" those works and understood what had been missing in the somewhat sanitized renditions that I had either heard or been part of with American orchestras and conductors. There were stylistic and phrasing details that got to the core of the music in very convincing ways; the music made sense on a deeper level.