CD review: Sibelius Symphony No 4 - Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra/Maazel CD

Jean Sibelius (1865 - 1957) lived long after the composition of his last symphony and although popular in Scandinavia his symphonies took time to garner the reputation that they have now, and thus there were no complete cycle recordings until shortly before his death. There were two Sibelius symphony cycles recorded in the fifties - Ehrling in Stockholm (1952-53) and Collins in London (1952-55)   This recording made in 1968 comes from the next wave - made as part of a cycle recorded between 1963-68 by the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra under Lorin Maazel.  It is one of two cycles recorded in the 1960s.  Maazel's cycle is the first by an Austrian or German orchestra.  Sibelius was not well liked in Germany even into the 1960s so would have rarely appeared in concert.  One wouldn’t have associated this conductor or this orchestra with these works either. Maazel - as illustrated by his recordings for DG was a meticulous, fresh and exciting conductor, at home on the French masters and the German and Russian core repertoire.  But as it turns out it was a strong combination - the unique sound of the VPO suits this music especially their strength and warmth of the strings and the penetrating brass and woodwind timbres.  The recording is excellent and then gets a very strong sense of perspective in the Sofiensaal in Vienna. This recording comes from sessions in March and April of that year.  

Sibelius was, I think more readily received in the US than middle Europe, Koussevitzky had conducted a cycle of the symphonies in concert in Boston before WWII and was known as a passionate advocate of Sibelius and commissioned The Oceanides.  Leonard Bernstein was also a supporter of the composer and both a pupil and a disciple of Koussevitzky.  Bernstein conducted all of the symphonies in New York in the composer's centenary year 1965.  He also recorded them between 1961-67.  Maazel was French by birth but was brought up in America and made a very early reputation there, so here were two American conductors seeking to occupy the same space.  So it may well be that the two were in competition in one of those record company races to get the first stereo cycle on the shelves.  I wonder from this reading if Maazel was up against a more committed commercial adversary.  Their respective record companies knew what they were doing though - in many ways their sets were fantastic adverts for Sibelius and still endure. 

As far as the other competition goes at the time, there was little and this fine Decca stereo recording soon garnered three star status in the UK Penguin Guide (which guided collectors in the 60s, 70s and 80s), though one of the three editors of that publication was Robert Layton, who wrote the liner notes for the Decca release.  I dare say sonically it is worth 3* though I have my doubts about this kind of interpretation. It has the merits of a fine orchestra and a driven conductor coming together on unfamiliar repertoire.  The result produced appealing and revealing views of the works - unique given the orchestral sound. Even when Bernstein swapped sides and recorded Sibelius with the VPO in the mid-1980s the sound of the orchestra was much less distinct.  We have had many good and great recordings of both cycles and individual works since then.  I think that a benchmark was set by Maazel in this recording though interesting to note his later cycle with the Pittsburgh Orchestra did not match this outing.

Looking back on recent and older reviews I think our vision of the work has changed a little since the 1960s. I think people now better understand the symphony's connections to, and differences from its siblings.  It sits alone in the canon but it is clearly a work of great power and atmosphere.  Some argue nowadays that it is not the bleak, eruptive and disturbing work many feel it to be.  I disagree because I sense a huge weight and inertia even in the lighter movements in this work and a crushing inevitability to some tragedy that unfolds.  My feeling is since the time that Maazel made this recording Sibelius conductors have learnt that “less is much much more” in the symphony.  The recording and interpretation in this case is a tad too forceful and perhaps sometimes exaggerated. The Vienna Philharmonic play gloriously but they ride rough shod at time over some of Sibelius’ more subtle dynamics. And there’s little time for reflection or interest in the introspective nature of the music when the ideas decay.  It feels then more of a work where the conductor's heart is on his sleeve.  Perhaps it feels much more like a reading of a romantic symphony in the hands of Maazel - where occasionally nuance is made into a full-blooded gesture, but most times the half-said goes unsaid. The subsequent recordings which stifle the dramatic voice are I think more effective. The voices in this this symphony are at chamber orchestra scale except for that eruption in the slow movement, the ending is quiet but deep as an abyss. 

Movement by movement we can see how the hopelessness of this work’s conclusion is compromised.  For example, although the first movement under Maazel is gloriously sunny we would now expect something a little more uncertain. The second movement is bright to the point of obscuring the darkness and somewhat fleet to the point where its restlessness is has no time to be heard.  The third movement lacks mystery and does not have the the ability to disturb in a way that is required for the full impact of the final movement. In the fourth movement Maazel wears his heart on his sleeve, when his head should be in his hands.  There is no sense that the drive of the work is ebbing away and the optimism with it.  Crucially the music feels now too fast and is played louder than Sibelius marks it in the final bars. And whilst beautifully done it does not leave the listener high and dry.  It favours a somewhat mellower sunny spot these are very rare and found nowhere else in Sibelius’ symphonic finales.

There are many good reasons to listen to this recording not least the playing is often breathtaking and Maazel should be credited for getting that out of an orchestra which was unfamiliar with the idiom. The reading may well stay in fashion - it is for those of us who like such things - already available on a BluRay disc as a high resolution recording.  But it doesn't do the trick for me. I prefer to hear readings that eventually reveal what we have feared all along - that the undercurrents are stronger than the waves on the surface. It is a work of genius and a portrait of the engulfing effect of despair.