In order to upset the scale towards the minus side (to the found wanted) I have to draw your attention all, to the fact that the sound of this CD is annoying: It is the sound that killed DGG reputation in the late sixties and in the seventies.

The recording is taken a bit too far from the orchestra - which gives rise to the GLASSY huge of the Berlin hall with its STRANGE reverberation.
The Hall sonic properties by themselves are too bright and returns a vague diffused acoustics. This hall is certainly not in the same league as the Concertgebouw hall, the Chicago old hall, the Vienna "shoe-box" hall, the Kingsway-hall, London, and others...

The microphones DGG used were the "nazzal"-sounding Nuemans-brand.
Should this interpretation have been recorded in a better hall with a more talented sound engineers (not adhering to the DGG sound-policy of that time, that said that all DGG recording should sound good on any playback system... and you know what means...it means medicare...)
Should this policy have been ignored, we would have had a magnificent account of Beethoven nine.
As it is - it is an irritating sound that would make one turn somewhere else for a better recordings of this work: consider SOLTI Chicago affair (twice on Decca - one ADD, the other DDD), consider an EMI recording or so - but certainly not this one, for your ear's sake.
In order to upset the scale towards the minus side (to the found wanted) I have to draw your attention all, to the fact that the sound of this CD is annoying: It is the sound that killed DGG reputation in the late sixties and in the seventies. The recording is taken a bit too far from the orchestra - which gives rise to the GLASSY huge of the Berlin hall with its STRANGE reverberation. The Hall sonic properties by themselves are too bright and returns a vague diffused acoustics. This hall is certainly not in the same league as the Concertgebouw hall, the Chicago old hall, the Vienna "shoe-box" hall, the Kingsway-hall, London, and others... The microphones DGG used were the "nazzal"-sounding Nuemans-brand. Should this interpretation have been recorded in a better hall with a more talented sound engineers (not adhering to the DGG sound-policy of that time, that said that all DGG recording should sound good on any playback system... and you know what means... it means medicare... )
Should this policy have been ignored, we would have had a magnificent account of Beethoven nine. As it is - it is an irritating sound that would make one turn somewhere else for a better recordings of this work: consider SOLTI Chicago affair (twice on Decca - one ADD, the other DDD), consider an EMI recording or so - but certainly not this one, for your ear's sake.