Double Double.(comparing different recordings of classical works)

In Issue 83, Tom Lyle and I compared two recordings of Finnish composer Jean Sibelius's Symphony No. 4. In that comparison, both Tom and I favored the RCA Victor release featuring Sir Colin Davis leading the London Symphony Orchestra (RCA 09026-68183-2, coupled with Symphony No. 1), which was released in 1996. Just as we were completing our comparison, a classic recording of the Sibelius was re-released as part of the Decca Legends series, Lorin Maazel's 1968 recording featuring the Vienna Philharmonic (Decca 289 466 995-2, coupled with Symphony No. 6 and Tapiola). Tom and I decided that we had enjoyed listening to this music so much that it would be fun to continue our comparison by matching the Davis disc against the Maazel. As always, we have prepared our remarks independently: other than deciding that these were the two CDs that we wanted to compare, we have not discussed these recordings with each other. Because this is an even-numbered issue, Tom will lead things off with his observations, and then I will offer my view of these two recordings.

TL: These are two very different versions of this symphony. On the Decca version, the VPO's playing is breathtaking, but delicate it is not. Tempos are quick, and Lorin Maazel seems to muscle his way through the score. At least that is the way the recording portrays it, because it comes across as sounding very aggressive. The transfer from the analog tapes robs the overall sound of its dynamics, and seems to be over-equalized as well. The beautiful cello in the first movement is a perfect illustration of this. The playing is better than first-rate, yet it sounds like his cello is electrified, coming through a stack of amplifiers rather than resounding naturally through the grand hall. It is a rock `n' roll Fourth Symphony. Because of the lack of recorded dynamics, each musician seems to playing as loudly as possible. This isn't to say that Maazel doesn't demand the piece be played as written, but again, the recording makes this almost meaningless.

Is this the way Sibelius intended this symphony to sound? That is doubtful. Still, it is very appealing, especially to a "young" person like me; yet I don't think one could get a full appreciation of the work from this CD. Parts seemed to be covered up so the intricacies in the score are often lost. The Maazel version is, as Decca states, "legendary". But it is an account to be listened to for historic purposes only.

Sir Colin Davis, on the other hand, shows us why this is such a great symphony by letting the music speak for itself. Supporting the music is great playing by the LSO and a near perfect interpretation by Sir Colin. The score comes across as much more complex than Maazel's version. Davis seems to immerse himself in the score, bringing out every nuance for one to hear. The modern digital recording lets one hear everything that's written, and is naturally portrayed with very few perceivable recorded artifacts.

I think it is rather obvious that this symphony is largely influenced by the landscape that surrounded Sibelius throughout his life. The combinations of the bleak, cold landscape, and the beauty that comes from the spring thaw that leads to the short but beautiful summer is illustrated in music. The four movements take on the appearance of the four seasons. But I think it might not be that simple, and Davis lets you know this throughout the score.

This is a complex work with a simple message. Or is it? It is extremely thought provoking, and a near perfect version of one of my favorite symphonies of all time. The recording quality is outstanding, and the conducting and playing are as sympathetic as one could hope for. If one wants to hear Sibelius' Fourth Symphony as it should be played, the Davis/LSO on RCA is the one to get.

KWN: As I remarked in Issue 83, the Sibelius 4th is one of a group of 20th-century 4th symphonies that I really enjoy (Arnold, Rubbra, Shostakovitch, Simpson, and Vaughan Williams are the composers of the others), and I really looked forward to comparing the Davis performance, which I really like, to Maazel's performance. I can't quite recall with certainty whether I once owned an LP of the Maazel (I think I did, but can't swear to it), but I do know with certainty that I have a cassette version tucked away in a corner somewhere. In any event, I was tickled to see that the Maazel is now available in a remastered CD version, and I was further tickled that TK agreed that this comparison would be an interesting follow-up to our previous session.