When Sibelii Symphonies Recordings now are discussed: I have lately
begun changing my opinions on Sarastes live S:t Petersburg set, to the
better.  I must say that where this set is at best, it is good really.
The 1st symphony is very powerful and living, and that is not just
"nothing": The first movements special Sibelian sonataform demands
understanding to work out (but I need to listen more to this), and in the
first two symphonies, the last 3/4 of the symphonies are weak (compared
with the first movemetns), and to make them shine, I can think, is a good
damned work for the performers.  Maybe on the whole this set is perhaps
not everywhere inspired, but I am actually about to say that still this
set "works".  To me, the weakest part is Kullervo, as I don't like the
singers.  But this could just be a matter of taste, proibably Hynninen
and Groop are the best Finnophones avaliable.  Also it might be unfair
to compare Kullervo with the later symphonies, as it was written so early
as a first serious attempt (read: "first published attempt", there are
scetches from anearlier never completed orchestral work) by the composer to
write a large orchestral work and he was only 25.  Also; although Sibelius
shows an astonishing sence for the large form, it might be founded on other
idea than the shoestringeconomy later symphonies.

What are the listmembers opinions on Sarastes set?

Mats Norrman
[log in to unmask]