Here we have superb performances of both these early symphonies which can hold 
their own with any current performances, even including those of live recordings 
by Nielsen’s contemporaries Erik Tuxen and Launy Grøndahl on Danacord DACOCD 
351. No. 2 particularly is extremely vital, which makes a wonderful change after 
some other modern performances, which smooth the contours of these wonderful 
works.

The overall characteristic in my opinion of these early symphonies, is that of 
vitality and both of these performances display this characteristic to the full.

The Finlandia recording is superb, and the orchestra is set in a fully 
believable acoustic. According to the notes, the recording was done in the 
Sibelius Hall in Lahti, the new home of the Lahti Symphony Orchestra. The 
Finnish Radio Symphony Orchestra has improved in all departments over the years, 
and is now a first rate ensemble. Put into a superb acoustic the improvements 
are noticeably superior.

The first symphony was written before the composer had written much else, and 
given these circumstances, Nielsen’s ability to create a fully reasoned expertly 
crafted symphonic argument such as we have here is incredible. There are not 
many composers who could write such a mature symphonic work as this at the first 
attempt, and it is we who benefit from the composer’s facility.

We have here a traditional four movement work, with the slow movement occupying 
its traditional second place, followed by an intermezzo and rapid finale. This 
is not particularly notable – where Nielsen was at the forefront was in the key 
structure of the work. The work starts in C Major, but the first movement is 
basically in G Minor. As the work progresses the tonality progresses from G 
Minor to C Major. This is similar to what Mahler was experimenting with, and 
both composers came to much the same result simultaneously, albeit totally 
independently.

The second symphony was a further development of the tonality tried out in the 
first, and also had a semi-pictorial programme, the symphony being based on a 
woodcut which Nielsen had seen in a pub when out with his wife and friends. This 
woodcut showed in four pictures, the four temperaments of man – Choleric, 
Phlegmatic, Melancholic and Sanguine. These form the basis and character of the 
four movements, and once again Saraste and his orchestra put these 
characteristics very clearly in front of us, the lucky listeners.

I would now rate this Nielsen cycle at the top of the modern cycles. The only 
criticism could be of a comparative nature concerning the technical quality of 
the orchestral playing. For example the standard of the playing of the San 
Francisco Symphony Orchestra with Blomstedt on Decca could be considered to be 
marginally better. The performances are just as good – go buy the Finlandia.

  --John Phillips