"It has been over two decades now since Gunter Wand and his Hamburg band recorded the complete symphonies of Beethoven. When his set, particularly this Ninth, entered the market, it was already a glutted field, with fantastic cycles from Szell, Karajan, Toscanini, and Bohm to name a few. However, it was immediately recognized as an important addition to the Beethoven discography. But since then, not only have we seen important cycles from Bloomstedt, Abaddo, and Rattle, but the Johnathan Del Mar editions of the symphonies were released and subsequently recorded to acclaim by Zinman, Vanska, van Immerseel, and Jarvi. Indeed, the Vanska and Jarvi cycles were particularly note-worthy because both conductors showed how there was still something new to say in this music. So, in light of all this "new" Beethoven, does Wand's Ninth still stand as a reference edition or is it beginning to show its age?
I am happy to report that Wand's Ninth is just a fresh, exciting, and interpretively exciting as it was twenty years ago. And while our ears have certainly been tempered by the period and historically-informed movement, which might account for the heaviness of Wand's account, the interpretive merits of this performance are many. For one, Wand adopts a moderate tempo for the opening allegro, but imbues the music with unheard-of energy, not through unnecessary rubatto or indulgent excessiveness, but by incisive playing, crisp articulation, and a keen understanding of sonata form. The development is one of the most trilling on disc, but the beginning of the recapitulation is truly special, showing how the sheer force and muscularity of Wand's reading creates a much for satisfying climax than those of conductors who have the brass down-out the strings. Wand's Scherzo will certainly sound big to modern ears, especially with the timpanist who does not always keep tempo. Still, the wind playing is about as spectacular as you'll find on disc, certainly as colorful as the above listed reference editions, and more idiomatic than either Zinman or Vanska. The always problematic trio seems perfectly placed and ebbs magically out of the music of the Scherzo proper. The tempo in the adagio, to me, is ideal, at sixteen minutes, which allows Wand and his players to shape the music without letting tension sag.
The finale is equally fine, a satisfyingly large performance. The opening orchestral recititive and joy theme is really wonderful, while the tutti outburst before the entrance of the baritone is truly terrifying. The huge climax on Gott is stunning, but Wand wisely has the Turkish march start immediately at a good clip, not only maintaining tension but setting the pace for the great double fugue. The closing passages and coda bring the symphony to a thrilling, and hair-raising conclusion. The soloists are some of the finer on disc, not simply as individuals but because their ensemble work is sensitive and quite well balanced against the mass of singers and players.
It is no surprise that this "Big Band" Beethoven is still viable in today's market. Wand's interpretations are intelligent, well-versed, and sensitive to the great Viennese tradition. His understanding of sonata form is unparalleled and his ability to work within this structure is stunning. There are numerous Ninths in the catalogue, but this Ninth demands consideration. And at this budget price, no lover of this music can be without this performance. Reference."
Simply has more power than any other version out there
Eric S. Kim | Southern California | 12/30/2005
(5 out of 5 stars)
"Gunter Wand's rendition of Beethoven's ninth symphony is something that everyone (who likes classical music) should own. Herbert von Karajan's version doesn't even come close to the sheer beauty and magnitude of all four movements in this one hour piece. The vocal quartet do a fine job of expressing Beethoven's true feelings about brotherhood, and the choir doesn't miss a step, though some vocal parts in the last movement may not be well-polished. The tempi perfectly captures the spirit of Viennese Classicism, and the finale is the strongest (and loudest) I've ever heard. It is certainly a must."
Would Make a Fine First Ninth
Moldyoldie | Motown, USA | 03/27/2007
(4 out of 5 stars)
"There's absolutely no reason to pay full price for a first-rate recording of Beethoven's Ninth when there's this very fine budget offering!
The venerable conductor of Hamburg's orchestra, the now deceased Günter Wand, takes as straightforward an approach as one can imagine without ever slipping into overdrive. This performance from 1986 is so reminiscent of George Szell's from 1961 in both tempo and flavor that this later recording becomes self-recommending for a novice by sheer virtue of its superior digital sound.
There's nothing terribly imaginative nor heaven-storming here, just fine orchestral and choral execution with the very servicable soloists blended nicely into the soundstage. The slow adagio third movement goes by in a fairly rapid sixteen minutes, so the unique rapturous quality found in the recordings of Furtwängler and Fricsay is missed. (To be truthful, most novices would probably just as soon get the slow movement over with faster anyway!)
No, it won't supplant the likes of Böhm, Schmidt-Isserstedt, Karajan, Leibowitz, and now Fricsay among my favorite Ninths; it's simply too conventionally conceived and executed. The forces at work, while hardly sounding provincial, are no match for the likes of Berlin and Vienna; but if anyone wants this great work in their collection for the price of a song...."
One of the finest 9ths of the digital era. Compare and contr
dv_forever | Michigan, USA | 06/22/2009
(5 out of 5 stars)
"I intend this review to be a direct rebuttal to Santa Fe Listener's attempted dismissal of this very fine recording. Before I examine this 9th point by point, I'd like to make a few things very clear. I don't know whether there exists a Gunter Wand cult in the British press or in Germany but let's be real here. Gunter Wand is NOT a great conductor. But he can be a very good one. The NDR Orchestra is NOT a great ensemble. They are more than competent however. There are no big starry names among the soloists and the choir used here does not have an international reputation. With all that being what it is, how can I rank this as one of the finest 9ths of the digital era?
It's very easy. As any hardcore classical fan knows, the digital era has been dominated by very lackluster Beethoven conducting. We have the preponderance of period-instrument hacks making a mockery of the 9th and then we have a bunch of ultra-literalists like David Zinman who have no feeling for this music but still force their asinine interpretations on the public. The music magazines and CD guides give rave reviews to this inartistic nonsense and the people still buy it. How many great 9ths can you find in the digital era, friends? Very few.
Quick digital roll call. Well, there is Karajan's final version. It's primary failure is the weak soloists. There's the obnoxiously slow version from Karl Bohm. He made it right before he died. A memento to a career, yes, but a great 9th? No. Then we have Bernstein's "Ode to Freedom" debacle, Solti's insufferable digital remake, Abbado's three tries, one with the VPO, two with the BPO. All average or second-rate stuff. Sinopoli gave an underwhelming performance with the Stattskapelle Dresden. Tennstedt has two live versions out. Big romantic conceptions but sound quality suffers from the acoustic which robs the performances of detail. Apart from these starry names, you get Muti, Sawallisch, Haitink, Vanska! Make it stop please! Seems like Gardiner's period band CD is not so bad by comparison.
With all this dreck floating around in the digital arena, it's not hard to see that a forthright, passionate post-war literalist performance under Wand aided by fine soloists and an enthusiastic chorus and capped off with outstanding digital sound would be a prime candidate for the best.
Put this Wand CD up against any conductor in the digital era and you'll come away knowing that Gunter Wand is for real. A notorious perfectionist, he kept a small repertoire and had a tendency to re-record it over and over. But Wand was so pleased with this particular performance that he refrained from redoing the 9th again. Wand did have a chance to work with the BPO in the 1990s. It would have been sweet to hear them do the 9th under Wand, but alas Wand was pleased enough by this earlier record and didn't feel the artistic need to remake it.
In comparing and contrasting dozens of abysmal Beethoven performances from the digital era, let's say 1980 to present day, it's safe to say that Gunter Wand comes out right at the very top. But how does his forthright post-war literalist intepretation compare to the many classics from the analogue era? Let's analysis them one by one.
WAND VERSUS KARAJAN
Karajan's DG account from the early 60s is one of the greatest versions ever made in warm, ambient, analogue sound captured in the right acoustic setting. Every time I listen to it, it feels like a live performance. Highly charged and at times almost vicious in it's power, how does it stack up against Wand?
The pacing is fairly uniform for the two conductors with Karajan allowing more room to breath in the instrumental movements. The first movement has Wand really letting the brass rip through the orchestral texture, especially during the development section. Karajan instead prefers a blended sound with emphasis on the strings. His take on the first movement is volcanic energy all the way. The scherzo is ferocious under Karajan but Wand is no wimp either. The adagio has Karajan conducting with the utmost polish and beauty. Wand is not far behind, hardly a proficient run through. This is a very moving adagio.
What about finale? Here come the biggest differences. Wand is very prosaic in the opening instrumental recitative, this is one of his weakest moments. Once the chorus comes in, watch out! Because Wand's performance starts to catch serious fire, just like in the first movement. The digital sound from RCA is outstanding and has great impact. The chorus is clear and vibrant. Karajan's chorus is mushy and is blanketed by the BPO orchestral powerhouse. Karajan's soloists are amazing but I found Wand's singers terrific as well. Wand's digital sound makes the percussion section very clear and focused.
During the huge orchestral/choral tutti on the words "vor Gott!", Wand hits the climax and moves onto the march section very quickly. Karajan holds the climax and lets it ring. An example of why Karajan is a great conductor and Wand is not. After the tenor solo, successful under both conductors, we get the instrumental fugal section. Wand's orchestra limps it's way through it obviously under stress while the BPO under Karajan flies like a rollercoaster. This is an example of why the BPO is a great orchestra and the NDR is not. However, here comes the big moment with the reprise of "Freude Schoner Gotterfunken". Karajan's back placed chorus is underwhelming when you wish they would just blow you away. Wand's chorus on the other hand does blow one away! They are so loud and ecstatic in this section, that it makes it a moment to remember. The rest of the performance is terrific.
Overall, I would give Karajan 1962 the edge in the instrumental movements and the recitative of the last movement but Wand may just have the edge in the finale overall on account of the chorus plus the highly impactful and clear digital recording.
Karajan's other version is the acclaimed 1977 performance. It's hampered by DG's crazy miking techniques of the era. The sound doesn't have great ambience and the soloists are miked too close. Wand is clearly ahead here.
THE WINNER? - KARAJAN 1962 WINS IN THE FIRST THREE MOVEMENTS WITH WAND HAVING A CHORAL EDGE IN THE FINALE.
WAND VERSUS FURTWANGLER
No point beating around the bush. Whereas Karajan and Wand are both post-war literalists and therefore are similiar in their approach to Beethoven... Furtwangler is in another league altogether. Furtwangler's 1942 record is cataclysmic with a rapturous 20 minute adagio that puts every other conductor to shame. If you have a tendency to forget that this is some of the greatest music ever composed, do yourself a favor and listen to it under Furtwangler. His later Bayreuth 1951 version doesn't generate as much heat but it still has the humanity that most conductors miss.
THE WINNER? - FURTWANGLER BY A LONG SHOT BUT WAND HAS THE CLEAR EDGE WHEN IT COMES TO SOUND QUALITY. OUTSTANDING DIGITAL BEATS OUT OLD MONO ANY DAY, EVEN IF FURT'S MONO IS QUITE GOOD FOR IT'S TIME.
WAND VERSUS TOSCANINI
Toscanini made several versions. His studio account is the one with the best sound. There is a live performance from 1939 that is highly charged but the sound is very limited. Sounds like it's coming from an underwater dungeon. Anyway, the studio version is intense but inflexible. Wand is more romantic and lets the music breath.
THE WINNER? I MUCH PREFER LISTENING TO WAND'S ACCOUNT. NO OFFENSE TO TOSCANINI FANS BUT I THINK MOST PEOPLE WOULD CHOOSE WAND HERE.
WAND VERSUS KLEMPERER
Klemperer's two stereo accounts, one on EMI and one on Testament, are similar save for one feature. On his Testament CD, the timpani are very much the star of the show. They're very forward in the sound picture and dominate the argument. Klemp's first movement is rugged and powerful, the finale is blessed with fantastic singing all around, especially on the Testament CD. However Klemp's scherzo is slow and ponderous with too many repeats. His adagio is taken at a strolling andante pace and I'd give the edge easily to Wand in these two movements.
THE WINNER? WAND HAS THE EDGE. HIS PERFORMANCE CUTS EVERY MOVEMENT FROM THE SAME CLOTH WHILE KLEMPERER'S PERSONAL STYLINGS MAKE HIS SCHERZO AND ADAGIO TOUGH TO LOVE.
WAND VERSUS BERNSTEIN
I already dismissed the "Ode to Freedom" concert so it falls onto Bernstein's earlier records to challenge Wand. The NYPO CD from the 60s has the young Bernstein in command. The strings have that old Columbia edge that annoys me but the real deal breaker is the finale. Bernstein does the exact same thing with the later VPO version. The finale is pushed and pulled about at a slower pace than usual. Overall Bernstein's plan for this movement is episodic, not symphonic! That is a bummer. At least it's not as atrocious as the "Ode to Freedom" concert.
THE WINNER? WAND WINS ALL THE WAY. IF YOU'RE A BERNSTEIN FAN, I'D GET THE VPO VERSION AS HIS BEST TAKE ON THIS MASTERPIECE.
WAND VERSUS SOLTI
Solti's digital remake is painfully slow and the digital sound is dull. However, Solti's earlier account from 1972 is one of the better versions of the stereo era. He builds his conception on Furtwangler with spacious tempos. No, Solti's not flexible with tempos and he lacks the spiritual dimension that Furtwangler naturally inhabits. But Solti's adagio is nearly 20 minutes long and he makes it sing. The finale has amazing choral and solo work under famed choral director Margaret Hillis. The tempos of the first and third movements will be too slow for many listeners, however.
THE WINNER? WAND. WHILE SOLTI IN 1972 HAS THE GREATER ADAGIO AND HIS CHORAL WORK IS AMONG THE BEST, WAND'S SINGULAR ENERGY AND DRIVE ALONG WITH THE WONDERFUL DIGITAL SOUND GIVE HIM THE EDGE OVER SOLTI.
WAND VERSUS ABBADO
Abbado is supposed to be "the conductor of our time". In that case, woe has befallen our time! Abbado's three attempts at recording Beethoven's 9th are all deficient in some way or another. His first with the VPO is a safe, German romantic account without much going for it. His 1996 live Salzburg performance on Sony is with the Berlin Philharmonic and it has little drama and no sense of occasion. Why does Abbado constantly restrain the BPO? Let them go nuclear like with Karajan! Abbado is all room temperature. His last take is on DG and this one I did not like one bit. Boring, small orchestra, terrible sound quality.
THE WINNER? WAND ALL THE WAY. SORRY ABBADO FANS. LIVE WITH IT!
WAND VERSUS SZELL
George Szell's version from Cleveland is much in sympathy with Wand's conception. They are both literalists, sometimes to a fault. But I tend to prefer Wand's more enthusiastic first movement with some sinister brass work. Wand's adagio is also more moving than Szell's take on it. The finale from Cleveland has a sense of occasion and yet Gunter Wand has that plus massive digital sound!
THE WINNER? WAND.
WAND VERSUS RATTLE
With Simon Rattle, we're back in the digital era, recorded a few years ago. His version surprised me initially because it's very traditional and I like that. Rattle was a timpanist when he was a youngster and he lets the timpanist of the Vienna Philharmonic really tear into the recapitulation of the first movement. Still, despite Rattle's traditional ideas for the instrumental movements, his finale is a tad weird. Screeching piccolo anyone? How about a chorus that is nearly shouting at times? This aside, Rattle is still has what it takes but EMI lets him down in the sound department. The sound is opaque and has little to no concert hall ambience.
THE WINNER? WAND WINS FOR PERFORMANCE AND ESPECIALLY FOR SOUND QUALITY.
WAND VERSUS GARDINER
If you must go for a period conductor, this is it. Well played, great digital sound but frenetic pacing and a superficial interpretation of even the most profound moments in the symphony. With faults such as there, Gardiner will never win me over as anything more than a temporary diversion.
THE WINNER? WAND EASILY.
There you have it, enough is enough. If I haven't yet convinced you of the quality of this Gunter Wand CD, all you have to do is spend a miserable seven dollars and find out for yourself if this performance is indeed something special. My feelings on the matter are very clear. This is one of the best 9ths that we've had in the past three decades. Happy listening!
Track Listings (5) - Disc #1