Hakon Borresen

[Alan Howe]

If I can't find a letter like this, I copy and paste from an internet page. Voilà: ø !

[Mark Thomas]

Extending the tangent even further, the best program for inserting such letters on the Windows platform is PopChar. But to return to Børresen...

[Justin]

I found a short video of what appears to be a news story on Borresen's connection with the town of Skagen:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1Lme-Nbb4A

Unfortunately it is entirely in Danish, but thought it would be interesting to those who speak it.

[dhibbard]

I also agree with Alan. The cpo discs are the better alternative.  I have both sets.

[Greg K]

Everyone says "better", but nothing about why.

[eschiss1]

And not always the same one, if I recall (Lace & Barnett on Musicweb prefer Schmidt, anonymous? reviewer @ Gramophone slightly prefers Hughes, etc.)

[Alan Howe]

Everyone says "better", but nothing about why.

Better playing, better recording. OK?

[Greg K]

OK, - so not better interpretively then.  It's in regards to that I'd expect a bit of elaboration.

I'll take a superior interpretation over better sound and playing (within certain limits) almost always.

[Alan Howe]

The weight and intensity of the cpo performances are the deciding factor for me. And the playing and recording are very fine.

If you want superior interpretations, go for the cpo releases.

[Alan Howe]

...in any case you can surely make some comparisons on YouTube and decide for yourself:
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=borresen+symphony

(I know what I can hear - and I stick by my original assessment.)

[Greg K]

Having done the YouTube comparison you suggest (in regards to Symphony 1 only) I agree with your assessment.  Schmidt/CPO DO manifest greater "weight and intensity" than Hughes/DaCapo, the sound is richer, and the playing more refined.  Even if the difference is more than marginal it's not a blowout, - Hughes & Aalborg bring the work across decently enough.  But based on my initial listen of at least Symphony 1, I'd choose the CPO also if I was acquiring just one.  As for the music itself, it held my attention even if nothing truly special.  Perhaps Symphonies 2&3 will be more individual and accomplished, as I'd expect.   

[Alan Howe]

Symphony No.1 is highly enjoyable, warmed-over Tchaikovsky. You should find No.2 less derivative.

[eschiss1]

No.2 is also the most recorded of his symphonies, with several broadcasts having been issued; the only recordings of nos. 1 & 3 to be commercially released I think have been parts of complete cycles. No.3 from descriptions I've seen, may even be slightly out of our remit, or maybe not. (Timewise it is, stylistically one would have to check...)

[Alan Howe]

Symphony No.3 dates from 1926, but (stylistically) it's a perfect fit for discussion here.

[Justin]

Symphony No.3 dates from 1926, but (stylistically) it's a perfect fit for discussion here.

Particularly the third movement (Allegretto moderato). It sounds like a lovely late 19th century waltz that would fit well in a ballroom.

The Radio-Sinfonie-Orchester Frankfurt under Ole Schmidt takes it at a much more graceful pace, and the strings sound fuller than with the Aalborg Symphony Orchestra.