Recordings WITH repeats--recommendations sought

[BrahmsGuides]

Hi, Brahmsians!
I have a request. I am looking for good recordings of some works WITH exposition repeats.

First (and this is laughable), I need a recording of Symphony #1 with the repeat. Years ago I paid top dollar for the then-new and lavishly packaged DG Abbado set (with overtures, Haydns, and four short choral/orchestral works) and was absolutely amazed and flabergasted that the recording of the First did not contain the expo repeat when the much longer exposition of the Second WAS repeated (the one in the Third is pretty much always taken since the movement is much shorter anyway and everyone knows that Frisch and others have argued that it's necessary for the movement's logical argument).

Anyway, while collecting the complete works on CD, often racking up multiple copies of various works, I somehow never managed to snag a recording of the First that includes the repeat. Can all of you help me with recommendations of the best ones that are currently available that do include it? I would prefer one available on CD to one only available as a download.

Also, and probably more obscure, I need a recording of the G-major string quintet, Op. 111, that includes the repeat. I have the old DG set of Quintets and Sextets with the Amadeus Quartet and Friends, which is quite wonderful except for their idiotic decision not to take this repeat (maybe the cellist had angst about it--who knows, as that opening cello line is brutally difficult). They also skipped the expo repeat in the Op. 18 Sextet, but that doesn't bother me because the movement is already dang long without it and there's no second ending. But Op. 111 does have an intriguing-looking first ending, and I'd sure like to hear it. So if anybody knows of a good recording that includes it--please let me know. Again, CD would be preferable to download.

Thanks so much!!!!

[Mischa]

Solti repeats the exposition in his CSO recording. And it's a very fine recording. At least I'm convinced he did, I have the recording at home currently, but to be sure, maybe the label has some more informations.

I never understood why the cello intro isn't repeated often in the quintet. Usually cellists are living for music like this. Old cellist's joke:

Q: How do you make a cellist play fortissimo?

A: Write espressivo in his notes.

[BrahmsGuides]

Bernstein from 1990 includes it too, I imagine? That looks fairly easy to get used. I still don't know why Abbado didn't take it. It could have fit on the disc, even though the Academic Festival and Gesang der Parzen are on there too.

[BrahmsGuides]

Looks like there's a brand new release (April 2009) on Hänssler of the Op. 18 Sextet and the Op. 111 Quintet. Verdi Quartet with Buck and Voss. Judging from the timings, the repeats are included in both works. Since those are the precise two pieces in which Amadeus does NOT take the repeats in my Quintet/Sextet set, it looks like this disc is one to buy, even if a little pricey. I didn't see any reviews on it yet; must be too new. Buck is the cellist from Melos, who have a WONDERFUL Brahms/Schumann quartet set on DG, so it looks like it might be a safe buy.

[Despina41]

Speaking of Brahms recordings, has anyone recorded his reworking of the Bach Chaconne for left hand alone?

it's WAAYYY better than that silly overblown Busoni nonsense.

[BrahmsGuides]

It's on the complete piano works set played by Martin Jones on Nimbus.

[Mischa]

it's WAAYYY better than that silly overblown Busoni nonsense.

I must say, I really like the Busoni, it has such an orchestral power...

On the other hand, I fail to take to the Brahms, the playing with left hand only makes it a bit stolid, but was it ever concepted a "serious" work, not just a technical study?

[Despina41]

Originally Posted by Mischa

I must say, I really like the Busoni, it has such an orchestral power...

On the other hand, I fail to take to the Brahms, the playing with left hand only makes it a bit stolid, but was it ever concepted a "serious" work, not just a technical study?

Ok, let me explain that I don't like the Busoni because I find that all the extra chords and "orchestral" textures upset the dramatic structure to my mind. It turns Mahleresque, with multiple climaxes --and no actual trajectory. It's possible, of course, that I just keep hearing crappy performances of it. I mean, pianists can't seem to play Bach, no matter how romantically it's re-composed..

A study? sure. But probably less so than the Paganini Variations. What pianist hasn't heard a master violinist play that piece and wish they could "own" it themselves? I know my friends and I feel this way. I think Brahms's arranging it for left hand A) preserved the textural integrity and difficulty of the piece - how easy to play with both hands; and B) more important, just gave himself and a bunch of pianists a real way to the piece.

[Chilperich]

Karajan is a great misser-out of Brahms exposition repeats. This is most grievously damaging, I think, to the formal balance of the first movement of Brahms's Third Symphony. (The development begins with an amazing transformation of the second subject that should come as a delicious surprise after the exposition repeat rather than being thrown away too soon.)

[BrahmsGuides]

Originally Posted by Despina41

A study? sure. But probably less so than the Paganini Variations.

I disagree with that. The Chaconne is a straight arrangement, not even counted in the McCorkle WoO numbers (which the Hungarian Dances, also "arrangements" are, WoO 1, in fact). It has no original material. The Paganinis may be technically challenging, and they may be called "Studies," but the material is wholly original and clearly written with public performance at least somewhat in mind (hence the big codas). That's why they have an opus number, whereas something like the 51 exercises, which are more "pure" studies, does not.

Incidentally, has anybody heard the recording on Naxos by Idil Beret of the exercises? That ain't exactly background music, but that's Naxos and the woman recorded EVERYTHING, including the easy version of the Op. 39 waltzes. I see now that Köhn and Matthies weren't content to record the original four-hand and two-piano stuff (well, if you want to call Op. 34b and Op. 56b "original"), but they're now systematically going through all the four-hand and two-piano arrangements of various orchestral and chamber works. I call that overkill.

One thing I really can't stand are the arrangements of the Liebeslieder and Neue Liebeslieder Waltzes without voices. What's the point, really? The pieces lose every ounce of charm without the voices. Yeah, they're in the Gesamtausgabe and have their own "opus numbers" and everything, but I choose to ignore their existence. For me, "Op. 52" is the Liebeslieder Waltzes with voices, and "Op. 65" is the Neue Liebeslieder with voices and basta! There is no Op. 52a....there is no Op. 65a....