I certainly came of age in the 70's so this was unquestioned as the greatest of all and I still love it and find it very exciting. But as usual, Dave, you. have opened me up to hearing others with fresh ears and I'm always grateful for it.
Kleiber conducted something like 100 plus symphony concerts; I believe that's the right number. Plus a couple of hundred opera performances. I was lucky to see one of them in Chicago, including the Fifth. One of my most valued musical memories.
Thanks to CZcams we can listen to no longer available great performances - like Szell’s live performance from 1969 on Orfeo and Szell’s MUST listen Missa Solemnis
I agree entirely. I think marketing has a lot to do with Carlos Kleiber's recording being of ''reference'' status. I find Erich Keiber;'s recording is more urgent, more exciting and is very well recorded. I also think the Concertgebouw play better on this occasion than the VPO. Most of my friends are oblivious of the fact Carlos even had a father who recorded the 5th. When I play the earlier recording to them they are amazed. It was originally only in mono, being from 1953, but Decca did a marvellous job processing it in stereo for their budget 'Eclipse' label in 1969.
The original LP was in a foil cover with a sort of chrome impressionism picture of Carlos. I have always loved it...even before I knew who Carlos was (did know he was Erich's son). Karajan quipped, later in Carlos' career, that "Carlos only conducts when the refrigerator is empty." But REFERENCE really implies consensus and there are non-marketing reasons surrounding this recording to justify that consensus. I have all of the other recordings Dave referred to and. learned the piece as a child from my Dad's 1939 78's of Toscanini & NBC...Carlos shares some of that energy.
@fred6904 Szell’s 1967 recording of the 5th with the Concertgebouw is fire and brimstone. Should have been the reference recording. Szell always did a powerful 5th.
@@XerxesLangrana Thank you. Szell's Philips Concertgebouw 5th is in every respect better than Kleiber's VPO 5th. Haven't spent a listening lifetime comparing recordings of B5, but I've heard my share of them and the Kleiber falls into the category of being an inexplicable cult recording.
In this Kleiber recording, those famous first notes truly come in as a whiplash, and the following performance has enormous urgency and forward drive. I also find the tempi in the other movements exactly right. In my book, it totally deserves its reference status, and I believe that it has retained its status on account of the abovementioned merits.
@@klenaghanny No: he's claiming 'urgency and forward drive' and ''exactly right tempi' as reasons for its reference status, which implies that reference status has something to do with the intrinsic merit or characteristics of the performance. But David says it's the reference _not_ because of any of its performance characteristics, which he actually says he thinks includes being 'a tad mechanical and a bit perfunctory'. Instead, it has reference status because "He had the name, the Kleiber brand recognition, DG promoted the living daylights out of it, and it was available in every possible format. It was easy to identify. Because of the scarcity of his discography, it stood out. And that's what matters. *For that reason only* (emphasis mine!)" In other words, David is re-stating that reference status has little to do with the merits of a performance, usually; and everything to do with the history of the music industry of the time.
@@dizwell If this recording wasn't excellent, we would have a different Beethoven 5 reference. While Carlos Kleiber cultists would still insist that his recording is the best, normies would not agree. I am not disagreeing with Dave: if Carlos Kleiber wasn't famous and released that CD, it probably would become well known over time due to its quality, but we'd have a different reference.
@patrickhackett7881 Nope. See David's reference recording for Mahler 4. The recording can be relatively poor and still be the reference. In this specific case, no-one's claiming it's rubbish, but no-one's claiming it's a brilliant performance either. The reference status has *zero* to do with the performance quality. David has a whole separate series on "the best X". This is not that series. Those talks are all about the quality of the performance. These ones are about the history of the classical music recording industry.
I think the Brahms 4 is still a reference. I watched two videos from channels aimed at novice classical music listeners. Both were about explaining that different conductors have different interpretations and there is no one right way to play a piece, used Brahms 4 as an example, and compared clips from two conductors-- Carlos Kleiber and someone else. The videos claim both interpretations are valid, but the comments usually are biased in favor of Kleiber.
If I recall correctly, Kleiber was going to do another Beethoven symphony recording with Vienna, and he got pissed off about something and drove back to Switzerland and never returned, stunning both the Vienna Phil and the DG recording crew.
Interesting points Dave. I have a few 5ths including Kleiber's of course. I've been listening to Markevitch's recently online and yeah, I can see the attraction to it. It really blazes away especially the finale. The woodwinds seem more characterful than with modern orchestras. There is a modern emphasis of having instruments "blend" when I think the orchestra sounds better if they do not. Maybe that started with Karajan "string sounds above all else" mentality. They have to be in tune but sound homogenous, no! I've heard recordings where trumpets, clarinets and oboes can be hard to distinguish from each other. That never happens in many older recordings.
It's a very good one as is his Brahms 4. For some reason both CDs have seen a bit of negative comments in recent years online but I still love them both. But for the most exciting Beethoven 5th I've heard? Staying with Kleiber for sure but daddy did it better! :D
Interesting factoid is that Carlos used Erich's score for his performances. Same doublings. I heard this from the announcer for a Chicago Symphony performance of the 5th that was conducted by Carlos.
Dave makes a valid point: Kleiber's 5th is one of the best, and which one of the best is "the" best is a matter of individual personal preference. Personally I respect Carlos Kleiber for NOT making hundreds of recordings, refusing to be a money machine for the big name classical labels. Karajan was a great conductor too, but why record the entire Beethoven Symphony Cycle THREE Times? Too many conductors and orchestras are pressured to record, record, record - and record more. Kleiber was pretty much able to choose what he was going to conduct and which orchestras he was going to conduct them with. I also think Carlos Kleiber was a conductor orchestras respected and he got the most from them without being a megalomaniac tyrant. His conducting of the Beethoven 4th and 7th with the Concertgebouw was never released on disc, but was recorded live on video. Most of the time we're not able to see the conductor as the orchestra members see him - full face on, instead of the back of the head audience view. The Concertgebouw players weren't intimidated by him, they were making music WITH him and doing their best. Were they the 'best" live recordings ever? Perhaps not, but the musicians, the conductor - and above all, the audience - appear to have been greatly moved, and you can't always say that with every live performance recorded or attended in person.
I always found this version to be a big letdown in the last movement. The original black on silver cover design must not have hurt its reputation either among a certain type of collectors…
I know Dave doesn't care much about this music, but Kleiber has another reference recording: his 1989 New Year's Concert is widely regarded as the best one.
Although it is truly a great performance, Kleiber's recording is not my favorite recording either. It is, among others, Günter Wand with the NDR Symphony Orchestra. By the way: Herbert von Karajan was not German, but Austrian.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Many thanks for your kind response. You might call it pedantry, for others it is a question of cultural sensitivity. When Mozart was considered one of the greatest Germans of all time on a German television program years ago, there was great outrage in the Austrian press. Although Mozart had a German father and was born in Salzburg in 1756, when Salzburg was not part of Austria but of the “Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation,” he is considered an Austrian and not a German composer. You may find this ridiculous, but as I said, at least for many Austrians it matters.
I was getting serious about Classical at the time and started buying both Stereo Review and High Fidelity, since in addition to the equipment reviews, they covered most varieties of music. I vividly remember opening Stereo Review's "Recordings of the Month" and seeing the photo of an intense Carlos Kleiber. Didn't read the review. Bought the Krips set on the cheap and was in no financial condition to have multiple versions...
Frankly, this recording has never resonated with me. I prefer Reiner on RCA Living Stereo and it beats me how Kleiber gets the acclamation for reference recording over Reiner, or Szell, or any number of other prior recordings.
I certainly came of age in the 70's so this was unquestioned as the greatest of all and I still love it and find it very exciting. But as usual, Dave, you. have opened me up to hearing others with fresh ears and I'm always grateful for it.
Kleiber conducted something like 100 plus symphony concerts; I believe that's the right number. Plus a couple of hundred opera performances. I was lucky to see one of them in Chicago, including the Fifth. One of my most valued musical memories.
I was there for that too. It was almost like going to a rock concert: “Wow, he did it just like the record!“
Thanks to CZcams we can listen to no longer available great performances - like Szell’s live performance from 1969 on Orfeo and Szell’s MUST listen Missa Solemnis
I agree entirely. I think marketing has a lot to do with Carlos Kleiber's recording being of ''reference'' status. I find Erich Keiber;'s recording is more urgent, more exciting and is very well recorded. I also think the Concertgebouw play better on this occasion than the VPO. Most of my friends are oblivious of the fact Carlos even had a father who recorded the 5th. When I play the earlier recording to them they are amazed. It was originally only in mono, being from 1953, but Decca did a marvellous job processing it in stereo for their budget 'Eclipse' label in 1969.
The original LP was in a foil cover with a sort of chrome impressionism picture of Carlos. I have always loved it...even before I knew who Carlos was (did know he was Erich's son). Karajan quipped, later in Carlos' career, that "Carlos only conducts when the refrigerator is empty." But REFERENCE really implies consensus and there are non-marketing reasons surrounding this recording to justify that consensus. I have all of the other recordings Dave referred to and. learned the piece as a child from my Dad's 1939 78's of Toscanini & NBC...Carlos shares some of that energy.
Szell's recording whith Vienna Philharmonic live in 1969 is available on CZcams. You owe it to yourself to listnen to it!
@fred6904 Szell’s 1967 recording of the 5th with the Concertgebouw is fire and brimstone. Should have been the reference recording. Szell always did a powerful 5th.
@@XerxesLangrana The Reference Recordings CZcams channel has that as one of its references.
@@patrickhackett7881 Yes, I know.
@@XerxesLangrana Thank you. Szell's Philips Concertgebouw 5th is in every respect better than Kleiber's VPO 5th. Haven't spent a listening lifetime comparing recordings of B5, but I've heard my share of them and the Kleiber falls into the category of being an inexplicable cult recording.
There are so many excellent recordings it’s impossible to pick any one “ best.”
And so I didn't.
In this Kleiber recording, those famous first notes truly come in as a whiplash, and the following performance has enormous urgency and forward drive. I also find the tempi in the other movements exactly right. In my book, it totally deserves its reference status, and I believe that it has retained its status on account of the abovementioned merits.
You would be wrong. I explained why it has attained reference status.
Isn’t he agreeing with you?
@@klenaghanny No: he's claiming 'urgency and forward drive' and ''exactly right tempi' as reasons for its reference status, which implies that reference status has something to do with the intrinsic merit or characteristics of the performance. But David says it's the reference _not_ because of any of its performance characteristics, which he actually says he thinks includes being 'a tad mechanical and a bit perfunctory'. Instead, it has reference status because "He had the name, the Kleiber brand recognition, DG promoted the living daylights out of it, and it was available in every possible format. It was easy to identify. Because of the scarcity of his discography, it stood out. And that's what matters. *For that reason only* (emphasis mine!)" In other words, David is re-stating that reference status has little to do with the merits of a performance, usually; and everything to do with the history of the music industry of the time.
@@dizwell If this recording wasn't excellent, we would have a different Beethoven 5 reference. While Carlos Kleiber cultists would still insist that his recording is the best, normies would not agree.
I am not disagreeing with Dave: if Carlos Kleiber wasn't famous and released that CD, it probably would become well known over time due to its quality, but we'd have a different reference.
@patrickhackett7881 Nope. See David's reference recording for Mahler 4. The recording can be relatively poor and still be the reference.
In this specific case, no-one's claiming it's rubbish, but no-one's claiming it's a brilliant performance either. The reference status has *zero* to do with the performance quality.
David has a whole separate series on "the best X". This is not that series. Those talks are all about the quality of the performance. These ones are about the history of the classical music recording industry.
I have that one! Like you, it is not my favorite, but I would recommend it to everyone! Thanks for the review.
I remember way back in the early days (the 80's), Carlos Kleiber's Berhoven's 4 and 7, and Brahms 4 also had reference status in places.
I think the Brahms 4 is still a reference. I watched two videos from channels aimed at novice classical music listeners. Both were about explaining that different conductors have different interpretations and there is no one right way to play a piece, used Brahms 4 as an example, and compared clips from two conductors-- Carlos Kleiber and someone else. The videos claim both interpretations are valid, but the comments usually are biased in favor of Kleiber.
If I recall correctly, Kleiber was going to do another Beethoven symphony recording with Vienna, and he got pissed off about something and drove back to Switzerland and never returned, stunning both the Vienna Phil and the DG recording crew.
Interesting points Dave. I have a few 5ths including Kleiber's of course. I've been listening to Markevitch's recently online and yeah, I can see the attraction to it. It really blazes away especially the finale. The woodwinds seem more characterful than with modern orchestras. There is a modern emphasis of having instruments "blend" when I think the orchestra sounds better if they do not. Maybe that started with Karajan "string sounds above all else" mentality. They have to be in tune but sound homogenous, no! I've heard recordings where trumpets, clarinets and oboes can be hard to distinguish from each other. That never happens in many older recordings.
It's a very good one as is his Brahms 4. For some reason both CDs have seen a bit of negative comments in recent years online but I still love them both. But for the most exciting Beethoven 5th I've heard? Staying with Kleiber for sure but daddy did it better! :D
I had a music history professor tell us "this recording is the absolute best and nothing before or since has ever come close!" and I was like "huh?"
Interesting factoid is that Carlos used Erich's score for his performances. Same doublings. I heard this from the announcer for a Chicago Symphony performance of the 5th that was conducted by Carlos.
And in the Seventh, where wrongly has the strings play the end of the second movement pizzicato.
the Markevitch Beethoven 5th absolutely cranks!
Dave makes a valid point: Kleiber's 5th is one of the best, and which one of the best is "the" best is a matter of individual personal preference. Personally I respect Carlos Kleiber for NOT making hundreds of recordings, refusing to be a money machine for the big name classical labels. Karajan was a great conductor too, but why record the entire Beethoven Symphony Cycle THREE Times? Too many conductors and orchestras are pressured to record, record, record - and record more. Kleiber was pretty much able to choose what he was going to conduct and which orchestras he was going to conduct them with.
I also think Carlos Kleiber was a conductor orchestras respected and he got the most from them without being a megalomaniac tyrant. His conducting of the Beethoven 4th and 7th with the Concertgebouw was never released on disc, but was recorded live on video. Most of the time we're not able to see the conductor as the orchestra members see him - full face on, instead of the back of the head audience view. The Concertgebouw players weren't intimidated by him, they were making music WITH him and doing their best. Were they the 'best" live recordings ever? Perhaps not, but the musicians, the conductor - and above all, the audience - appear to have been greatly moved, and you can't always say that with every live performance recorded or attended in person.
And we got glorious video images of sweat dripping from his nose, which seems to have been perfectly shaped for just that purpose.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Someone needs to bundle these pearls of wisedom and wit one day
I always found this version to be a big letdown in the last movement. The original black on silver cover design must not have hurt its reputation either among a certain type of collectors…
The black on silver cover was the Brahms 4th i think i remember. It felt a kind of cold (though the performance wasn't)
@@hiphurrah1 They both were I think. The first pressings of the Originals edition were too, before the silver was replaced by plain white…
I know Dave doesn't care much about this music, but Kleiber has another reference recording: his 1989 New Year's Concert is widely regarded as the best one.
I care very much about that music--I adore it. I just don't care about Vienna New Year's Concerts. I find them creepy.
Giulini/LA Phiharmonic (DG)
Although it is truly a great performance, Kleiber's recording is not my favorite recording either. It is, among others, Günter Wand with the NDR Symphony Orchestra. By the way: Herbert von Karajan was not German, but Austrian.
Spare us the pedantry please. He was from the German speaking world, and that's all that matters.
@@DavesClassicalGuide Many thanks for your kind response. You might call it pedantry, for others it is a question of cultural sensitivity.
When Mozart was considered one of the greatest Germans of all time on a German television program years ago, there was great outrage in the Austrian press. Although Mozart had a German father and was born in Salzburg in 1756, when Salzburg was not part of Austria but of the “Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation,” he is considered an Austrian and not a German composer. You may find this ridiculous, but as I said, at least for many Austrians it matters.
I vividly remember the over-the-top acclaim this recording received when it was first released.
I was getting serious about Classical at the time and started buying both Stereo Review and High Fidelity, since in addition to the equipment reviews, they covered most varieties of music. I vividly remember opening Stereo Review's "Recordings of the Month" and seeing the photo of an intense Carlos Kleiber. Didn't read the review. Bought the Krips set on the cheap and was in no financial condition to have multiple versions...
Frankly, this recording has never resonated with me. I prefer Reiner on RCA Living Stereo and it beats me how Kleiber gets the acclamation for reference recording over Reiner, or Szell, or any number of other prior recordings.