Search - Jean Sibelius, Neeme Järvi, Gothenburg Symphony Orchestra :: Sibelius: The Symphonies [Hybrid SACD]

"Spirit of the Pine Tree and the Wind"

R. Hutchinson | a world ruled by fossil fuels and fossil minds | 01/03/2006

(5 out of 5 stars)

"This is a splendid new Sibelius cycle from Neeme Jarvi, the Gothenburg Symphony Orchestra (the National Orchestra of Sweden), and the art department of Deutsche Grammophon. Symphonies No. 1 and 2 are recorded live, and the SACD hybrid sound is superb. The four discs are enclosed in a box, and the box and sleeves feature beatiful photos by Olaf Otto Becker.



The GSO's Sibelius tradition began in 1907, and Sibelius conducted the orchestra in 1911, 1915 and 1923. The Sixth Symphony is dedicated to Wilhelm Stenhammar, who was the GSO conductor at the time. Neeme Jarvi has conducted the GSO performing the Second Symphony, its "signature tune," more than 70 times (!), and several complete symphonic cycles, and so there is a deep rapport. I am hearing the Second with new ears, and my favorites, the Third, Fifth and Sixth, sound wonderful.



I make no claim that this is the best Sibelius cycle -- the cycle by Davis and Boston on Philips is still hard to beat -- but as with any of the greats, it's nice to have alternative interpretations to compare. This is a fine new cycle in state-of-the-art sound. (The quote I used for a title is a label Sibelius attached to a theme from the finale of the Sixth Symphony, but it could well describe much of the music of Sibelius.)"

If Robert Frost's Poems Could Sing...

J. Savett | Rockville, MD United States | 01/12/2008

(5 out of 5 stars)

"they would sound like these Sibelius symphonies. I already own the Colin Davis set on Philips and the Maazel set on Decca, but a friend of mine told me that Jarvi does a wonderful job here. I've listened to the set two times over and I'm quite glad a spent the money on a third. First of all, the symphonies SOUND the best on this set. That doesn't mean that I like every interpretation better than, say, Davis, but the music is crisp and clean, and it seems to me like Sibelius himself would have been pleased to have his compositions sound so organic.



The symphonies themselves, if you don't know them, are a must. When I first started listening to classical music a few years ago, I got quite caught up in Mahler mania. No one, at the time, told me much about Sibelius; while I like Mahler a lot, I absolutely LOVE Sibelius. The main difference between them, as captured in a conversation they had once, is that Mahler conceived of the symphony as a "universe in itself." His symphonies are sprawling (some say self-indulgent), some lasting over an hour and a half (I believe the 3rd is two hours). Sibelius believed that symphonies should reach toward formal and tonal concision. Like a good poet, he tries to get the most out of the least. But the other reason I love these symophonies is that they are so evocative. Like the title of the last reviewer's review, these symphonies are lush, melodic, glimpses at/from the earth...The photos inside match the music beautifully.



I believe Jarvi does an amazing job with symphonies 7, 2, 1, and 5. The rest are certainly very good.



Buy this set and enjoy, you won't be disappointed, though I'd also recommend Davis's set with the Boston on Philips. It's the first Sibelius I heard and it still defines HOW these symphonies should be played (this set defines how they should SOUND--and be packaged!)."

Agreeable, fairly plain performances of no real distinciton

Santa Fe Listener | Santa Fe, NM USA | 02/21/2008

(3 out of 5 stars)

"This is middle-of-the-pack Sibelius, joining at least eight current choices for coplete sets. As the other reviewers comment, it is very cleanly recorded (I listened in two-channel stereo, not SACD), which is in keeping with Jarvi's brisk, spirited approach to the music. He doesn't search for profound depth, and to some listeners that may come as a relief. For example, Jarvi's Symn. #1 casts aside any overblown comparison with Tchaikovsky; it proceeds quckly and alertly on its mission, at the opposite from Bernstein in his second recording with the Vienna Phil. (DG). The Gothenburg musicians play as if to the manner born, and their sound is lean and a bit sparse in the strings.



My reservations occur with Jarvi himself, a much recorded conductor who has never attracted my attention. He seems workmanlike, fairly energized but sometimes crude, and neer inspired. This Sibleius cycle does nothing to change my opinion. To qualify as a great performance, a reading must have ideas, personality, deep feeling. I hear all those things in Sibelius from Bernstein (his NY Phil. cycle on Sony), Karajan, Barbirolli, Beecham, and Segerstam. All of them make me believe in Sibelius's greatness. Jarvi aims for a more superficial effect, which is enjoyable so far as it goes.



Sometimes he falls below his own set standards. Sym. 7 is shockingly bland and unintresting. The slow movement in Sym. 1 is prosaic. I followed Sym. 2 without losing interest, but nothing special was happening. In sum, if you want a leaner, lighter approach to Sibelius, try Osmo vanska or Paavo Berglund with the Chamber Orch. of Europe. I'll stick with the tried and true greats from the past."