So there is something to be learnt after all. As it happens,
                  while I was listening to these performances I was also making
                  comparisons
                    between Ingrid Haebler’s Denon cycle of Mozart sonatas and
                    the plagiarized versions attributed to Joyce Hatto. I noticed
                    that quite often the pirated CD, with its added reverberation,
                    seemed a little faster. Yet, when the end of the movement
                    was reached, in most cases the speed proved not to have been
                    altered. This raised the question whether Haebler herself
                    might not have played a little slower if she had really been
                    performing in such a reverberant acoustic – simply to obtain
                    the same effect. 
                                     
                  
                  Here I think we have a case of a conductor doing precisely
                    that. Kleiber is pursuing exactly the same ideals but also
                    taking into
                    account such variables as the acoustics and the orchestra.
                    In order to seem the same, the performance actually has to
                    be a little different. This is no doubt why Kleiber’s performances
                    did not become stale. Although they might appear reproductions
                    of each other, they were actually created anew each time.
                                     
                  
                  Kleiber recorded the “Pastoral” twice – LPO 1948, Concertgebouw 1953.
                    I don’t know either of these but I 
discussed his
                    interpretation when reviewing the Kleiber volume in the “Great
                    Conductors of the 20
th Century” series, which
                    included a live performance from Prague with the Czech Philharmonic,
                    given on 20 May 1955.
                                     
                  
                  Though Kleiber’s tempo in the first movement may sound brisk compared
                    with Furtwängler or Klemperer, what actually impresses is
                    the relaxed steadiness with which it unfolds. There is no
                    repeat. The slow movement also unfolds warmly and inevitably.
                    Kleiber’s insistence on a uniform tempo means that at a couple
                    of points it seemed to me that he had slowed down. In fact,
                    he hadn’t and I realize that virtually every other conductor
                    speeds up at these points, with the result that I expect
                    it to sound that way. Similarly, I thought he was getting
                    gradually slower during the trio of the third movement. Again
                    I realized he wasn’t – I’m just used to hearing conductors
                    get faster and faster. 
                                     
                  
                  The peasants dance vivaciously, the storm is overwhelming,
                    but the real Kleiber revelation is again the finale. Beethoven’s
                    metronome marking is scarcely faster than that of the “Scene
                    by the brook”, and in fact Kleiber treats this as a slow
                    movement. It comes as all the more a surprise since he allows
                    no rallentando during the flute’s lead-in. Some other conductors
                    have attempted this, but they usually move on once they have
                    made their point. Kleiber has none of that. It’s a wonderfully
                    serene reading. I did have a few doubts here and there, though.
                    Is there enough activity in the music to fill such a slow
                    tempo? Even Klemperer is quicker by almost two minutes. Still,
                    the score does seem to ask for this, so I think lovers of
                    Beethoven should hear it and make up their own minds.
                                     
                  
                  Kleiber is very definitely concentrating on musical values here, and
                    the actual orchestral discipline is less good than in the
                    Fifth. Quite frankly, there is scarcely a bar which does
                    not have some sort of imprecision or fluff. Nor are the principal
                    oboe and clarinet exactly alluring in timbre.
                                     
                  
                  The Czech Philharmonic is clearly a finer band – and the recordings
                    are about equal. Yet there is a suspicion there that the
                    first movement is played there with a certain elegant efficiency.
                    I found that the slow movement began to achieve the magic
                    of the Cologne version about half-way through. The finale
                    is a shade faster this time. Perhaps Kleiber felt he had
                    taken it too slowly in Cologne. I’m not sure I agree. On
                    the whole, in spite of the lesser orchestra, I think I would
                    return more often to the Cologne version. Here are the timings: