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]