Haydn should have been called 'The Magician'. I find it good to remember that without Haydn there could have been no Mozart and no Beethoven, although perhaps they would have evolved in different ways. This is such a happy and energising account of this wonderful symphony. Thank you.
Haydn forever surprises me ... the slow movement in particular is one of the most complex and richly developed I have ever heard, and when one realizes that only his student Beethoven would produce anything of this level before 1830 ... and in fact, "duh-duh-duh-DUH" is in that slow movement long before Beethoven would write the Fifth Symphony! The minuet too is amazing ... for a moment in the trio one can hear the echo of much older music ... of hurdy-gurdy songs that Schubert would pick up later on ... just remarkable.
Did those folks in Vienna get a show like this every week? That shit is crazy!!!!! In the end Bernstein is conducting with his facial expressions! That's not just a maestro, that's a wizard!
Ma symphonie préférée de Haydn ; jusque là je l'aimais dirigée par Furtwangler, mais de la voir ainsi dirigée à Vienne par Lenny est un spectacle enthousiasmant !
Haydn conveys on symphonies as thisvone a sense of perfection I hardly find on other pieces, even if I love many other composers, from Bach to Brahms to Wagner. 13:19
Spot the women in the orchestra - go on there, keep looking. Then talk about the hey day of the VPO. This was the heyday whether you like it or not. Oh heavens and then there's the largo - this is Haydn at his most absolute sublime, understated beauty.
After hundred times of listening, I still don't fully understand how Hydn constructed the magical - alas very fleeting - contrapunkt seconds at 27:00...
I'm not a great Bernstein admirer...but I am convinced that late Haydn symphonies need a big band...and some small authentic instrument orchestras really do play too quickly. Bernstein's Paris symphonies still hold their own. And this symphony is among many people's favourites in the whole Haydn catalogue. I still think one can go the other way in terms of speed; the opening is a little too slow for me, as is the largo.
Bernstein conducts 88, 92, 94, and 101 very well for me. He is on top for me on these symphonies. Franz Bruggen is great too. My new favorite for earlier Haydn symphonies is the Milan guy Giovanni Antonio. He brings some seemingly dull earlier symphonies to lively new heights!
Yep, they weren’t allowed the same with the Berlin Philharmonic until early 2000 at least the Berlin Philharmonic was first then the Vienna Philharmonic much later
¡TRES INTERRUPCIONES! ¿Qué creen, que vamos a salir corriendo a comprar los productos o servicios anunciados que interrumpen odiosamente la sinfonia? Al contrario, NO
@@bloodgrss Haydn - Mozart too - used orchestras both large and small; Haydn’s orchestra when appointed to the Eszterhazy family in 1761 numbered about 14, growing to are regular 24 in the 1780’s. (Additional instruments were always to be found when required - four horns, one or two flutes, trumpets and drums, cor anglais, et cetera). The ‘Paris’ symphonies in the mid-1780’s (87, 85, 83, 84, 86, and 82) were conceived for and performed by an orchestra of about 60, and those for London in the 1790’s on the first trip of 1791/92 for about 40 players (96, 95, 93, 94, 98, 97), rising to over 60 on the second trip of 1794/95 (99-104). (The symphonies listed above appear in chronological order, not the Mandyczewski/Hoboken catalogue numbers). There’s no tight or wrong answer; you pay your money and make your choice, and for every Haydn symphony in my collection, I have period and modern, large-scale and small, harpsichord continuo and none…I would not be without any of them. You can do both Mozart and Haydn really well both big-scale and small scale, period performance and modern (Beethoven too);
@@elaineblackhurst1509 Yes Elaine, thanks as usual for your erudite post. My collection has a variety too. And, still love the Beecham London set with full forces; his own old and unauthorized antiquated scores, but no one has bested his beautiful phrasing and inherent musicality. As are his wonderful non-period instrument Handel pastiche ballets...
@@bloodgrss With a set like the ‘London’ symphonies, there is a wide choice of recordings all of which illustrate why you need more than just one approach. Of the historic sets - or part-sets - I’m normally less keen than I am than with modern recordings; the pre-Robbins Landon corrupted scores are an issue for me (almost everything pre-c.1970), but you’re right about the characterful performances of Beecham. My preferred historic recordings are by Klemperer with the Philharmonia that I was by lucky enough to pick up new and very cheap in an EMI two-box set some years ago containing symphonies: 88, 92, 95, 98, 100, 101, 102, and 104. (I had the LP of 92 and 95 pre-cds). Regardless of its age, it is good to hear Haydn played according to a performance tradition now long lost; I can recommend these Klemperer recordings very highly, and some are available on RUclips (where unsurprisingly I have left an occasional comment). An important point worth making regarding period v modern instrument recordings is that the former does not always mean small-scale any more than the latter always means big-scale. There are of course smaller scale period performances of the complete London symphonies by Kuijken and Bruggen, with Ton Koopman and the Amsterdam Baroque Orchestra’s current series using a string section of 5 4 2 2 1; but contrast this with Marc Minkowski’s enormous Les Musiciens du Louvres who uses strings of 12 9 6 6 3 - the difference is startling (also plus double woodwind). Likewise on the modern instruments front, there are well-regarded big-scale sets by the likes of Jochum, Davis, and not-quite-so-well-regarded by Karajan, but smaller-scale ones by conductors like Marriner with his ASMF, or Tate with the English Chamber Orchestra. Along with these different and various approaches, there are also ‘one-offs’ like the well received set by Leslie Jones recorded in the 1960’s with the Little Orchestra of London which utilises a keyboard continuo. Just for completeness, there is Harnoncourt with the Concertgebouw, Bernstein with the New York Philharmonic, and Szell with the Cleveland, and one or two others. Of all the sets mentioned above, there are very few I would not listen to with pleasure from time to time, but I should say here that the worst pair of cds in my entire collection in which I can find no redeeming features whatsoever is the 2 cd set of Symphonies 99-104 conducted by Roger Norrington with the London Classical Players (1992/93). The Norrington performances are unendurable - take my word for it; I have kept the set simply because it is so awful.
@@elaineblackhurst1509 I am sure you are a subscriber, but David Hurwitz's opinions are as erudite as yours. You may not always agree, but his musical knowledge rivals your own. The reason I mention this is your abhorrence of Norrington; I once attended a concert of his doing Schumann's 4th and Berlioz Fantastic Symphony. Perhaps historically informed, but awful, unexciting performances. I send you links; interesting what you think of them, particularly the London Symphony selections... ruclips.net/video/l5pBAjcyZOg/видео.html ruclips.net/video/7Xcg581qlpo/видео.html
Elegant and clipped, exacting classicism over romanticism in the faster movs, in contrast to his Mozart and Karajan’s Haydn, well judged faster tempos breezing forward with conversational interpolations, considerable intensity and overall unity, while avoiding trying too hard. However the slow mov then contrasts too much and the finale slightly is unserious; the overall conception lacks deeper values and interest, staying on the surface and showing ignorance of the music’s nature. It’s VPO-ized with an inevitable range of later Vienese overtones including J.Strauss and Bruckner and insistence on doing things their way, with even the plush and gaudy room they’re in bringing in extra social values; despite its qualities this is in dogged ignorance of HIP that indeed uncovers the real Haydn of unsold objectivity and crystalline poise; he may have lived in Vienna but there’s hijacking here.
1983? Wohl noch eine andere Welt. Aber, "miss-feähllt" etwa dadurch an der Musik an sich etwas ? Hadyn ist/bleibt wohl Hadyn ... ob sie sich jetzt irgendwas wünschen oder nicht...
Amazing brainrot, you must have to listen to such a marvelous performance of an amazing piece, for your only concern to be what genitals the musicians have...
Bernstein had a great love for Haydn, which makes this a great performance.
You can really feel him being full of happiness to conduct
Magnificent melodious music-making !! Bravo maestro!!
what a marvelous simphony, the Partenon of the classic period!
symphony
@@excelsior999 sanquiu
Haydn should have been called 'The Magician'. I find it good to remember that without Haydn there could have been no Mozart and no Beethoven, although perhaps they would have evolved in different ways. This is such a happy and energising account of this wonderful symphony. Thank you.
To insert a 48 measure canon at the measure in the development section of the last movement was a stroke of genius.
Sir Simon Rattle called Haydn, "A genius hidden in plain view."
une musique d'une grande beauté ,merci
Haydn forever surprises me ... the slow movement in particular is one of the most complex and richly developed I have ever heard, and when one realizes that only his student Beethoven would produce anything of this level before 1830 ... and in fact, "duh-duh-duh-DUH" is in that slow movement long before Beethoven would write the Fifth Symphony! The minuet too is amazing ... for a moment in the trio one can hear the echo of much older music ... of hurdy-gurdy songs that Schubert would pick up later on ... just remarkable.
Did those folks in Vienna get a show like this every week? That shit is crazy!!!!! In the end Bernstein is conducting with his facial expressions! That's not just a maestro, that's a wizard!
Bernstein was an excellent conductor who was well aware that he was in Show Business (especially when he was On Camera).
Absolutely Amazing 😍
Ma symphonie préférée de Haydn ; jusque là je l'aimais dirigée par Furtwangler, mais de la voir ainsi dirigée à Vienne par Lenny est un spectacle enthousiasmant !
0:30 1:54.
Largo 9:43 14:30
Finale 21:25
Gran director y gran obra de Haydn . Muchas gracias,
Merci pour ce icocrty❤❤ ❤❤❤
Damn that was so good
The four phrased tunes
BERNSTEIN THE GREAT !!
Would you agree if we change 'great' into GREATEST ???
Haydn conveys on symphonies as thisvone a sense of perfection I hardly find on other pieces, even if I love many other composers, from Bach to
Brahms to Wagner. 13:19
Spot the women in the orchestra - go on there, keep looking. Then talk about the hey day of the VPO. This was the heyday whether you like it or not. Oh heavens and then there's the largo - this is Haydn at his most absolute sublime, understated beauty.
Thanks!! Congratulations!!👏👏🌾🏞️🌾.
Lenny and the Vienna Philharmonic at their best
This would have pleased Haydn.
After hundred times of listening, I still don't fully understand how Hydn constructed the magical - alas very fleeting - contrapunkt seconds at 27:00...
하이든은 감정보다 이성적인 음악가.그의 연구적이고 실험정신과 근면ㆍ성실성은 위대하고 대단하다.
개인적으로 하이든을 가장 좋아한다.물론 힘들고 지루하지만 항상 이성적인 하이든이 좋다.❤❤❤
Bravo 🎉
Bernstein could be so great conducting Haydn !
HC Robbins Landon said Lenny was the best Haydn conductor.
Haydn, Bernstein, la Filarmónica de Viena!. Difícil pedir algo mejor ...
Eso mismo pienso yo
❤великолепно❤
Sheet joy - no less an authority than H.C. Robbins Landon thought Lenny was a top-notch conductor of Haydn and he was absolutely right
Это совершенно великая симфония Гайдна! Бернштайн хорош )
I'm not a great Bernstein admirer...but I am convinced that late Haydn symphonies need a big band...and some small authentic instrument orchestras really do play too quickly. Bernstein's Paris symphonies still hold their own. And this symphony is among many people's favourites in the whole Haydn catalogue. I still think one can go the other way in terms of speed; the opening is a little too slow for me, as is the largo.
Slower than most, but I quite like it. The contrast with the main section is great
Bernstein conducts 88, 92, 94, and 101 very well for me. He is on top for me on these symphonies. Franz Bruggen is great too. My new favorite for earlier Haydn symphonies is the Milan guy Giovanni Antonio. He brings some seemingly dull earlier symphonies to lively new heights!
Especially the tempo of the Largo is more than perfect!!! Almost as perfect as Bruno Walter! 🎉🎉🎉
no hands!
Yep, they weren’t allowed the same with the Berlin Philharmonic until early 2000 at least the Berlin Philharmonic was first then the Vienna Philharmonic much later
I prefer listening to this at playback speed 0.75 🤷♂
How many conductors today kiss their concertmasters after a performance?
Not enough
Was im Leben…? Warum hat der Konzertmeister jedes Mal eine ROTES Geige!?
👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏
The 5th movement sounds about the same as the 4th
It's a repetition of the 4th with no conductor. A Bernstein novelty.
ハイドン【交響曲第88番「V字」】
Listen to Paul Gilbert version of this on electric guitar. It will knock ur Sox off
Will it knock more socks off than Bernstein, Furtwängler, Walter or Doráti ever did?
🥰🌹❤👏❤🌹🥰
¡TRES INTERRUPCIONES!
¿Qué creen, que vamos a salir corriendo a comprar los productos o servicios anunciados que interrumpen odiosamente la sinfonia?
Al contrario, NO
19:38 це революція в музиці, Гайдн переверши сам себе
Effusive music making; Beethoven grittier in his eight symphony but could bit touch Haydn.
You shouldn't really, it's big band Haydn, you can do this with 25 or so players. A guilty pleasure...
But a pleasure indeed it is in full clothing. When he could, Haydn used as many musicians as he could...
@@bloodgrss
Haydn - Mozart too - used orchestras both large and small; Haydn’s orchestra when appointed to the Eszterhazy family in 1761 numbered about 14, growing to are regular 24 in the 1780’s.
(Additional instruments were always to be found when required - four horns, one or two flutes, trumpets and drums, cor anglais, et cetera).
The ‘Paris’ symphonies in the mid-1780’s (87, 85, 83, 84, 86, and 82) were conceived for and performed by an orchestra of about 60, and those for London in the 1790’s on the first trip of 1791/92 for about 40 players (96, 95, 93, 94, 98, 97), rising to over 60 on the second trip of 1794/95 (99-104).
(The symphonies listed above appear in chronological order, not the Mandyczewski/Hoboken catalogue numbers).
There’s no tight or wrong answer; you pay your money and make your choice, and for every Haydn symphony in my collection, I have period and modern, large-scale and small, harpsichord continuo and none…I would not be without any of them.
You can do both Mozart and Haydn really well both big-scale and small scale, period performance and modern (Beethoven too);
@@elaineblackhurst1509 Yes Elaine, thanks as usual for your erudite post. My collection has a variety too. And, still love the Beecham London set with full forces; his own old and unauthorized antiquated scores, but no one has bested his beautiful phrasing and inherent musicality. As are his wonderful non-period instrument Handel pastiche ballets...
@@bloodgrss
With a set like the ‘London’ symphonies, there is a wide choice of recordings all of which illustrate why you need more than just one approach.
Of the historic sets - or part-sets - I’m normally less keen than I am than with modern recordings; the pre-Robbins Landon corrupted scores are an issue for me (almost everything pre-c.1970), but you’re right about the characterful performances of Beecham.
My preferred historic recordings are by Klemperer with the Philharmonia that I was by lucky enough to pick up new and very cheap in an EMI two-box set some years ago containing symphonies:
88, 92, 95, 98, 100, 101, 102, and 104.
(I had the LP of 92 and 95 pre-cds).
Regardless of its age, it is good to hear Haydn played according to a performance tradition now long lost; I can recommend these Klemperer recordings very highly, and some are available on RUclips (where unsurprisingly I have left an occasional comment).
An important point worth making regarding period v modern instrument recordings is that the former does not always mean small-scale any more than the latter always means big-scale.
There are of course smaller scale period performances of the complete London symphonies by Kuijken and Bruggen, with Ton Koopman and the Amsterdam Baroque Orchestra’s current series using a string section of 5 4 2 2 1; but contrast this with Marc Minkowski’s enormous Les Musiciens du Louvres who uses strings of 12 9 6 6 3 - the difference is startling (also plus double woodwind).
Likewise on the modern instruments front, there are well-regarded big-scale sets by the likes of Jochum, Davis, and not-quite-so-well-regarded by Karajan, but smaller-scale ones by conductors like Marriner with his ASMF, or Tate with the English Chamber Orchestra.
Along with these different and various approaches, there are also ‘one-offs’ like the well received set by Leslie Jones recorded in the 1960’s with the Little Orchestra of London which utilises a keyboard continuo.
Just for completeness, there is Harnoncourt with the Concertgebouw, Bernstein with the New York Philharmonic, and Szell with the Cleveland, and one or two others.
Of all the sets mentioned above, there are very few I would not listen to with pleasure from time to time, but I should say here that the worst pair of cds in my entire collection in which I can find no redeeming features whatsoever is the 2 cd set of Symphonies 99-104 conducted by Roger Norrington with the London Classical Players (1992/93).
The Norrington performances are unendurable - take my word for it; I have kept the set simply because it is so awful.
@@elaineblackhurst1509 I am sure you are a subscriber, but David Hurwitz's opinions are as erudite as yours. You may not always agree, but his musical knowledge rivals your own. The reason I mention this is your abhorrence of Norrington; I once attended a concert of his doing Schumann's 4th and Berlioz Fantastic Symphony. Perhaps historically informed, but awful, unexciting performances. I send you links; interesting what you think of them, particularly the London Symphony selections...
ruclips.net/video/l5pBAjcyZOg/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/7Xcg581qlpo/видео.html
Elegant and clipped, exacting classicism over romanticism in the faster movs, in contrast to his Mozart and Karajan’s Haydn, well judged faster tempos breezing forward with conversational interpolations, considerable intensity and overall unity, while avoiding trying too hard. However the slow mov then contrasts too much and the finale slightly is unserious; the overall conception lacks deeper values and interest, staying on the surface and showing ignorance of the music’s nature. It’s VPO-ized with an inevitable range of later Vienese overtones including J.Strauss and Bruckner and insistence on doing things their way, with even the plush and gaudy room they’re in bringing in extra social values; despite its qualities this is in dogged ignorance of HIP that indeed uncovers the real Haydn of unsold objectivity and crystalline poise; he may have lived in Vienna but there’s hijacking here.
Good grief, get over yourself
No women musicians?
At that point The Vienna Phil was an all boys club.
1983? Wohl noch eine andere Welt. Aber, "miss-feähllt" etwa dadurch an der Musik an sich etwas ? Hadyn ist/bleibt wohl Hadyn ... ob sie sich jetzt irgendwas wünschen oder nicht...
Amazing brainrot, you must have to listen to such a marvelous performance of an amazing piece, for your only concern to be what genitals the musicians have...