(It's been a while since my last post, and that's because I have undertaken a listening marathon while quietly compiling these 5000 words on Sibelius)
Five years ago, I discovered the world of Sibelius through reading Alex Ross' "The Rest Is Noise". Sibelius might be the ideal pandemic-era composer. His music can vary between intense claustrophobia and celebrations of the wondrousness of nature -- often within the same work. He encapsulates the rawest emotions many of us felt during that time: first, the sense of being confined indoors, trapped in one's own psychological headspace, and second, the intense longing to burst outdoors and reconnect with nature and other living beings.
When I wrote this post I almost certainly had Sibelius' Fifth Symphony in mind. Over the years, I have come to hear it as the perfect symphony. And with a run time generally in the range of half an hour, the symphony is a concise and tightly controlled statement.
I'm fairly sure I have more versions of this symphony than any other classical work, and I'm about to embark on the nightmarish task of trying to rank them all. I don't claim to be a completist or to have heard most of the great versions out there. I just love collecting recordings of this symphony. The ground rules are simple: I am ranking only the recordings that I own through CDs or downloads. I am not considering recordings that I have heard via Youtube or other streaming services because then there would be no limit to the available inventory and this project would never finish. This means that I won't be ranking a notable recordings that I have heard and enjoyed. You have to draw the line somewhere.
In other words, this isn't a list of the "best" recordings of the symphony. Some of them aren't even good, as we'll see. But since I own them, I'll be ranking them. We can still use the bad recordings and all their faults to help appreciate the good recordings and what goes into making them so good. Many of these recordings are part of symphony cycles. In some cases I own the whole cycle, and in some cases I don't. Either way, I will be considering the recording of the Fifth Symphony only. I want to judge each Fifth on its own and not in the context of the conductor's approach to other Sibelius symphonies. Nothing gets bonus points for being part of a great cycle, or knocked down a peg if I didn't like other recordings in the cycle. Lastly, these rankings are of course subjective and on a different day or year there could be considerable reshuffling, particularly once I inevitably acquire additional recordings.
15. Leonard Bernstein, Vienna Philharmonic, 1987
In the '80s, Bernstein's tempos slowed down throughout much of his repertoire. In some circles, he was criticized for being overly grandiose and dramatic in his interpretations, which wasn't always fair, but those excesses became a fairer representation of his style as he got older. Nevertheless, the results could still be spectacular. I recently bought his recording of Schumann's Fourth Symphony, also done with Vienna a few years before the Sibelius, and it's a gem. The tempos are slow but gripping and turn bright and energetic in all the right places. In particular, the second movement is perhaps the very best that I have heard. It poses a challenge because all movements are played without a break, and finding a way to connect the weird and spastic first movement with this gentle, lyrical passage has confounded many a conductor. Not to mention that Schumann is generally weak with slow movements and the conductor has to manage the flow of the music leading into yet another abrupt shift in mood with the bombastic scherzo. With that recording fresh in my mind, I was eager to revisit Bernstein's Sibelius recordings with Vienna. I had thought they were dreadfully slow and wearisome but after hearing the Schumann, I was inclined to think that I had been missing something. Thus I began this Sibelius re-listening and ranking project with Bernstein's Vienna Fifth.
The recording is so bad that I nearly lost the will to continue with the rest of the rankings I wish I was exaggerating in claiming that it really is that tedious and bordering on unlistenable. Often in classical music, you don't really notice that the piece is dragging until the later movements, when the cumulative effect of the languid tempos has built up and the music loses its focus while building to the conclusion. In other instances, the boredom arrives earlier, once you reach the slow movement. This is the case for Bernstein's recording of Sibelius' Second Symphony in Vienna that he made around the same time. The first two movements nearly kill the piece but he brings it back together for a suitably thrilling finale. But the Fifth? It drags from the very first bar. The opening notes, reminiscent of an emerging sunrise, linger aimlessly and interminably, the audio equivalent of freezing one's gaze into a death stare directly at the sun. The should-be sublime moments in the final movement are flaccid and lifeless. For the final two chords of the work, he launches into a sudden accelerando for no conceivable reason. After maintaining such a slow tempo for the entire symphony, crushing the tempo for the final seconds is simply bonkers.
The sad thing is that Bernstein could be fantastic with this symphony, for Exhibit A, we have this performance with the New York Philharmonic over twenty years earlier, featuring (among other things) the most breathless opening to the finale that you'll ever hear. But like I said, I'm ranking only the specific recordings that I own. Bernstein gains no credit based on his prior greatness. In short, this recording is awful and I can't imagine ever wanting to listen to it again, except possibly in the context of a cruel practical joke.
14. Sir Colin Davis, London Symphony Orchestra, 1994
This was my first Sibelius Fifth. Knowing that Davis was a noted Sibelian, this felt like a can't miss choice. But I hadn't done my homework properly, because I bought the version from his legendarily bad cycle, as opposed to universally praised one.
I do credit Davis for wanting to differentiate these recordings from the ones he did in Boston twenty years earlier. That cycle was gloriously gloomy, with surprising interludes of sweetness and light. It featured snarling brass, swirling strings, and a flexible approach to tempo. Based on what I've heard from Davis with the LSO (this fifth is coupled with the third), he went for a more natural, lyrical approach, determined to let the music breathe and flow on its own. That sounds all right in theory, but in practice, Sibelius is too full of weird details and sounds to succeed with a conductor who just wants to beat time. And that's all that Davis does here -- count the bars and stand witness to directionless orchestral playing. The first minute of the first movement is OK but the sleepy orchestra never awakens, and the final crescendo in the scherzo section is flat and lifeless. The second movement is a load of nothing, background incidental music and nothing more, with no story or direction. The third movement, which could take off like a shot with those blistering sixteenth note runs from the violins, has zero urgency or attack. They play this section like it's a sight read in their first rehearsal and they're still trying to get the notes down. The tempo lags from the opening bars, and the whole thing simply limps along until a pitiful end. It's not as offensively interminable as Bernstein in Vienna, but I can scarcely imagine a more flaccid and boring recording.
13. Vladimir Ashkenazy, Philharmonia Orchestra, 1981
Ashkenazy is maddeningly inconsistent with Sibelius. He'll deliver moments of blinding grandeur, only to lose the flow of the music just seconds later, the interpretive equivalent of stumbling around like a drunken sailor. In the middle of the scherzo section of the first movement, there is a bewildering accelerando that goes nowhere and detracts from the ending a couple of minutes later. It's as if Ashkenazy blew his wad too early, had to slow down before attempting to careen toward the finish, and burned out the orchestra. The andante rolls along at a glacially slow pace, grinding to a near halt on a couple of occasions, meandering along and never building any momentum toward a destination. Those odd lurches in tempo are on display again in the final movement, but it bears fruit in the buildup to the final section, gathering a welcome dose of nervous energy leading into the final chords. This isn't a bad Sibelius Fifth, but it's one of the most frustrating, and not worth a recommendation when there are so many better ones out there.
12. Sakari Oramo, City of Birmingham Symphony Orchestra, 2001
This is a brisk performance but one sadly lacking in dynamics and emotional heft. The first movement is a full-on sprint, running just over twelve minutes. At that tempo, it should feel energetic, but instead, it comes across as an orchestra rushing to meet an early dinner reservation. The ebbs and flows of the music are simply missing. Similarly, Oramo's andante has a similar identity crisis. Sibelius always struggled to compose heavy, solemn slow movements. That's why the andante in this symphony usually isn't played all slowly. With the outer movements -- where the first ends quickly and the third starts quickly -- there's no need to play it too slowly, as it will already feel slow in contrast to the surrounding tempos. The idea is to keep the music moving, to make it sound effortless, and to create a sense of arriving to a destination -- easier said than done considering it's structured as a sequence of variations. Oramo's performance does indeed offer a contrast to the outer movements, but it just sort of coasts by while making almost no impression. The andante can function as an interlude between the co-main events of the outer movements, if that's how the conductor wants to play it. But it should never feel like background music, should never come across as superfluous.
The final movement is similarly lacking in the the necessary dynamics, beginning with a lax tempo and coasting into the swan hymn with the lethargic urgency. Oramo recovers a bit by the end but it's too little too late. There are some fleeting moments here, but overall, I can't recommend it. For what it's worth, the couplings on this disc (Karelia Suite, Pohjola's Daughter, and The Bard) are solid, so the orchestra was certainly competent with Sibelius at the time of the recording. But there was a dullness in the air when they recorded the Fifth Symphony that handcuffed the orchestra from the start and they couldn't recover from it.
11. Herbert von Karajan, Philharmonia Orchestra, 1960 (stereo version)
This is the first of three Karajan recordings on this list, so I can't help but compare them. This is a far more dynamic version than the mono recording from '52, which may be partly due to the engineering of the recording itself. Stated differently, the mono version is more uniformly bombastic, but perhaps it's because the quieter parts couldn't be recorded more clearly with the inferior technology, so the engineers added too much compression in an early example of the Loudness Wars, 1950's Classical Version. Alternatively, in the intervening years between '52 and '60, Karajan may have absorbed the enchanting qualities of the Sibelius tone poems or the Lemmenkainen legends and had a clearer understanding about how these pieces should be played. Then again, when did Karajan ever care about how something "should" be played, as opposed to his own stubborn conception of the work? This is a constant thread in Karajan's Sibelius -- he breaks with the conventional style and insists on doing it "his way", and it usually turns out wonderfully.
In this recording, the sonority is nicely balanced, which is uncharacteristic of Karajan, with less emphasis on the strings and more woodwind detail peeking through. There is a gloomy mystery to this interpretation that I find from convincing. Karajan was a lot of things, "haunted house" wasn't one of them. I like this performance, but this is the least of the Karajan recordings.
10. Colin Davis, Boston Symphony Orchestra, 1975
Davis' cycle in Boston is widely regarded as one of the best. While I may not hold it in the same esteem as many others, it remains a remarkable interpretation. As I wrote about in my review of the cycle a few years ago, there is a logical progression to the symphonies, allowing the listener to track the evolution of Sibelius' style like an evolving plot over chapters in a book. Each symphony sounds like a continuation of the one before it. This showed remarkable vision and focus on Davis' part, especially since these symphonies were not recorded in the order that they were composed.
However, after listening to all these Fifths as a group, the flaws in Davis' account become even more glaring. The first movement is simply too slow, among the recordings I'm reviewing here, only Bernstein in Vienna is slower (and by a mere 20 seconds). The pacing and expressionism is far better than Bernstein, but overall it's still a wearisome listen with that run time. The andante is good, but doesn't distinguish itself from the other fine versions I have been listening to. The final movement is the best of the three, with a blistering tempo that most conductors don't attempt. The string runs and tremolos are hypnotic and played with laser fine precision. I'm still not a big fan of the brass squelches characteristic of the Boston Symphony at the time, but it certainly is unique. In all, it's a brilliantly played Sibelius Fifth that was no doubt executed to Davis' exact expectations, but it nowhere close to the upper tier of recordings in my modest collection.
9. Petri Sakari, Iceland Symphony Orchestra, 1997
This is a very unique recording that disappointed me upon initial listens. I thought (and still think) that it comes across as a tentative, even milquetoast interpretation. The orchestra never lets loose at any point, perhaps for lack of trying, or perhaps for lack of technical prowess. The playing is somewhat sloppy during variations in tempo in the early minutes of the opening movement. This trend continues toward the end of the movement, when the scherzo never takes off and staggers to a timid conclusion.
However, there are some wonderful delicate, atmospheric bits in the first two movements that prompt me to make comparisons with icy glaciers and glistening frost-covered forests, since this is an Icelandic orchestra and all. The third movement also never takes off as it should and leads into a swan hymn that is short on power, but creates a gentler, soaring feeling that is nonetheless entrancing. There is a lot to like here if you meet this version on its own terms, so to speak, by accepting the emphasis on wintery, fairytale-like sonority, rather than what Sibelius wants (and what most interpretations deliver).
8. Yoel Levi, Atlanta Symphony Orchestra, 1990
This is a fine performance by the underrated Yoel Levi. The opening movement is sprightly, and flows with a nearly effortless momentum. Levi doesn't quite hit the transition point in the latter part of the movement, the pace doesn't quicken very much, but acquires a chugging and propulsive energy that feels a bit off to me. He makes up for it with a thunderous conclusion to the movement. The andante strides with a similar, natural air that unfortunately doesn't provide a strong enough contrast to the start of the first movement. I think this is by design but I prefer the andante with more of a folksy, atmospheric, even somewhat ghostly quality.
The third movement begins too slowly and has trouble getting into second gear. Once again, Levi struggles with the shifts in tempo that the music demands, as the prolonged opening passage doesn't gather enough momentum heading into the swan hymn. But as with the first movement, Levi recovers with a powerful final two minutes that ends the symphony on the highest of high notes. He's hardly the only major conductor to be a bit carefree with tempo changes (e.g. Karajan), but I find that Levi's approach saps the energy from the music at certain critical moments. Still, this is a recommended recording.
7. Tauno Hannikainen, Sinfonia of London, 1959
Before we get to the recording itself, some historical perspective is in order. Hannikainen was endorsed by Sibelius himself and conducted the music at the great composer's funeral. He recorded these symphonies at a time when interest in Sibelius' music was arguably at a post-WWII low and there were relatively few recorded versions available. Thus, Hannikainen's versions were praised (thanks to the scarcity of competition) and were viewed as more authentic because he was Finnish and had a personal connection to Sibelius. This type of nationalistic viewpoint (i.e. the Finns have mastered Sibelius instinctively, better than anyone else ever could) still exists today. For instance, witness Klaus Makela having a Sibelius cycle thrust upon him despite having very little to say with it, or Jukka-Pekka Saraste claiming straight-faced in an interview that non-Finnish orchestras are deficient in capturing the proper atmosphere of the second movement of the Fifth (skip to just before the 14-minute mark of the video).
As for the music, there is a unique serenity to Hannikainen's interpretations that is rather appealing if one is in the mood for a less energetic, unthreatening version of Sibelius. I do like how he brings the brass to the fore, but not in a blaring, smash one's ears with a fortissimo way. Most conductors keep the brass subdued until the big climaxes, but Hannikainen achieves a blended strings-plus-brass sonority that evokes a peaceful calm and is wholly unique. The second movement has a folks-y, whimsical air which may be what Saraste was referring to in the interview linked above. But before we give Saraste too much credit for tapping into the forested beating heart of the symphony, he also talks about it's requiem-like qualities which to me comes across like a complete contradiction. How can it be a nature ode and a tribute to the Finnish countryside and also an emotionally wrought requiem for one of Sibelius' closest friends?
Nonetheless, it's clear that Hannikainen goes with the first option throughout the work. As a result, some might find the final movement to be bland and underplayed. I think it's the best part of the recording. After navigating the first two movements rather quickly, Hannikainen takes the third movement at a leisurely pace, with a soaring, dramatic swan hymn section. However, he refrains from playing at full volume until the very end, where it becomes the piece's sole climax. Hannikainen seizes this moment, making his one attempt at a fortissimo truly impactful.
6. Herbert von Karajan, Philharmonia Orchestra, 1952 (mono version)
Karajan stands apart from just about every major Sibelius conductor. He broke the unwritten rules by mostly ignoring Sibelius' tempo markings and not caring one whit about the composer's concept of the symphony as an extended advert for vacation homes overlooking Finnish lakes and forests. Karajan saw this music as an exercise in orchestral power -- lush strings and mighty brass leading a symphonic roller coaster from one hefty climax to the next. That's not to say that Karajan had nothing to say between the crescendos, in fact it's the opposite. He was a master of managing the flow of the music by crafting mesmerizing lyricism via highly disciplined string playing. Granted, when you have a tunnel vision approach to tempo and only care about keeping the music chugging along at the pace you choose, the concept of "flow" is greatly simplified. But Karajan had a vision for Sibelius and it almost always worked.
The first and second movements here are very strong, showing a maximalist approach to the music. True to form for Karajan, there is little in the way of fluttery bird dynamics and the woodwinds are mostly buried in the mix. The third movement is surprisingly the weakest, never quite expressing the necessary power. The tempo actually ticks upward while launching into the tutti portion of the swan hymn, which is weird. It seems as though Karajan was still figuring out this symphony, but recall that Sibelius was still alive at the time and hadn't written new music in over two decades. The post-war Sibelius revival was just getting started, and the Fifth Symphony was only thirty years old. The blueprints for performing this work were still being established.
5. Herbert von Karajan, Berlin Philharmonic, 1965
This is definitively the best of the three Karajan recordings that I'm reviewing in this post. Now in full control of the BPO, this version sees Karajan molding the string sonority of his orchestra like a master puppeteer. The first movement is full of serene, yet dynamic moments with string details that you simply don't hear from other conductors. In the climax of the first movement, leading into the transition to the scherzo section, the music is supposed to bloom in a technicolour explosion of brass. Instead, the brass is completely subdued but the music swells into a blurry, drone-y haze. Karajan ignores the rules and forges his own path -- and the results are exhilarating.
The andante is airy and brisk (just under eight and a half minutes), again with pristine string playing and everything else subdued. The violins are perfectly in unison, and the basses sound particularly clear and powerful. Karajan wants a specific mood and this is the sonority that he needs in order to get it. The finale starts out tense, sweeping and urgent leading into the swan hymn -- and keeps barreling on, with no slackening of the tempo. Again, Karajan ignores the conventional approach, and the results are powerful and deeply affecting. Later on, he does bring the music to a near standstill in order to set up the furious final minute. To me, the balance sounds a bit off with the horns and tympani drowning out nearly everything, but it's surely what Karajan wanted and the outcome is breathless.
4. Herbert Blomstedt, San Francisco Symphony, 1991
This is my newest acquisition, one that I'm listening to for the first time while compiling these rankings. In fact, it's the first recording that I've heard from Blomstedt's widely praised cycle in SF.
Blomstedt's Sibelius is bright and energetic, it sounds natural and effortless when it needs to (e.g. the opening two minutes), but also tense and overwrought when the music calls for it (e.g. the transition to the scherzo in the first movement). In fact, the tightly coiled, dramatic build in the scherzo may be the finest I have ever heard. The second movement is one of the quickest ones, running just eight and a quarter minutes, and is simply a masterclass in controlling the tempo and keeping the music consistently engaging. Sadly, the final movement is the weakest in Blomstedt's reading. He copies Karajan's approach to tempo (consistent, almost metronomic) but the climaxes lack the theatrical power that Karajan brings and that the finale sorely needs. On the other hand, in comparing the two, Blomstedt achieves an orchestral balance that Karajan could never approach (nor attempted), providing colour and detail that Sibelius demands but that Karajan consistently neglects. Besides those critical underplayed moments (admittedly a significant weakness of the recording), this is about as perfect a Sibelius Fifth that you'll hear.
3. Eugene Ormandy, Philadelphia Orchestra, 1955 (mono version)
Running just under 29 minutes, this is the quickest Fifth in my collection. Ormandy's version is characteristically lush owing to the sublime string playing that features prominently in the mix. During the development section in the opening movement, he coaxes nightmarish screams out of his violins -- a wholly unique sound that is unmatched in any of the other recordings considered here. The andante runs under eight minutes and thus really *moves* -- a slow gallop propelled with metronomic efficiency. I think Ormandy pushes the tempo too much, leaving no space for the music to breathe during this nature walk of a movement. But that's my personal taste. Heard on its own terms, Ormandy sticks with the concept and executes it nearly perfectly.
The final movement takes off like gangbusters, a breathless and electrifying sprint. It should be noted that Ormandy is one of the few conductors to achieve the proper contrasts in tempo, thereby realizing the "arc" in tempo modulation as Sibelius intended. The first movement is supposed to begin slowly and gradually speed up (nearly every conductor succeeds with this), and the third movement should do the opposite, completing the second half of the arc. Most conductors can't pull it off, and some (e.g. Karajan) ignore the arc almost completely. The final section is heart-wrenchingly slow, harrowing, and builds to a volcanic conclusion. The only real criticism is in the orchestral balance. The strings drown out everything, burying the horns under a cloud of tremolo at precisely the times when they need to be heard the most. Otherwise, this is a first rate recording, and dare I say that it's a criminally underrated one?
2. Osmo Vänskä, Lahti Symphony Orchestra, 1997
Vänskä's cycle in Lahti was the first one I bought, and it was performances like this that really made me fall in love with the Fifth Symphony. Vänskä truly made the symphony his own, more so than any other conductor, which is especially impressive considering he recorded it at a time when there were already dozens of competing performances available. The pacing is perfect -- leisurely flowing but never too slow -- and yet full of unusual idiosyncratic changes in cadence that are always alluring but never distracting. The clarity of tone of the orchestra is remarkable, and the sonics are magnificent. Vänskä goes from super pianissimo (one of his calling cards) to thundering fortissimo like it's the most natural thing in the world to pull off, and yet no other Sibelius conductor comes close to replicating this degree of mastery over such a wide range of dynamics. The fact that Lahti is a smaller orchestra actually works in its favor—they never sound "compressed" at high volume, and key instruments and details never get lost in the recording. The finale, among its many wonderful moments, features the quietist super-pianissimo that you'll ever hear from a symphony orchestra at about 3:20. It's as if Vanska wanted to pull off a magic trick -- the Incredible Vanishing Orchestra -- just to prove that he could. And it still works amazingly well in the context of the music! The final three minutes are the most emotionally devastating, gut-punching orchestral Sibelius in existence. A perfect recording with a wholly deserved reputation.
1. Paavo Berglund, Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra, 1974
Sometimes you read through a list of the 100 Best Albums/Songs of All Time and it features the usual canonical material as well as some odd and adventurous choices. Then you get to #1 and it's a Beatles song or "Pet Sounds" and it feels like a letdown. After all that, they went with the safe, accepted choice? There are often some big surprises in the top ten, particularly around #3 or #4, essentially making the case for more recent albums ("best ever" lists always skew towards older, widely accepted choices) and underappreciated classics. Those entries are enough to make you sit up and take notice, but not quite high enough to seriously challenge the top spots.
I guess this is one of those lists.
As is well known, Berglund arrived in Bournemouth in the early 70's and transformed the orchestra into one of the finest Sibelius (and Nordic music in general) ensembles that have ever existed. If you're looking for Sibelius recordings featuring a maximialist symphonic sound, then this is it. Berglund mastered both the airy, delicate passages and the thunderous climaxes equally well. He achieves a symphonic balance that no other conductor can touch. One consistently hears powerful, blended timbres from the orchestra as a whole, while still maintaining the clarity of individual instruments and sections. Small yet significant details ring through that are simply not heard on most recordings.
There are plenty of reasons to prefer Vänskä's creativity in dynamics and tempo, or Karajan's bold stoicism, or Blomstedt's sprightly approach. But for my money, Berglund gets it consistently right better than any other conductor, by a wide margin. Vänskä can be a bit eccentric and idiosyncratic, Karajan's balances are often off (with the strings and brass taking over), and Blomstedt tends to be a bit too cool and restrained. Berglund succeeds in areas even where other excellent conductors fall short.
It wasn't my intention to revisit all these Sibelius Fifths only to confirm what I already knew. It just turned out that way. Berglund is simply undeniable, and his achievements in this music remain unsurpassed.
