The performance of the Schumann isn't really competitive. Hynninen and his partner adopt an ill-disciplined, unstable and subjective approach that is inimical to the natural flow of Schumann's music. The singer is prone to emphasize the first beat in every bar and thereby to distort line and create a jerky effect. Against that it could be argued that this direct, unsophisticated approach is a welcome antidote to ultra-refined readings. But if you want this more instinctive way with the cycle you should wait until early next year for the Decca reissue of the Waecheter/Brendel recording of 1962, which has the same effect without offending so many of the truths of Lieder interpretation.
The account of the Brahms is more successful. The profound and pessimistic feeling of the first two songs, taken quite quickly, is treated by Hynninen in a kind of defiant, rash way very different from the customary sense of resignation and desolation. In the third, Hynninen uses his strong, vibrant voice to good effect in delineating the contrasted effects of the death on rich and poor, and produces some finely turned pp effects. The final song has the right elating effect, a turn to optimism after the encircling gloom. I don't think this is a performance to displace those of Kipnis, Hotter and Ferrier in my estimation but it has its own validity. In both works the Finnish baritone's German isn't always idiomatic. The recording, which the notes tell us is unedited, has immense presence; indeed, it is a bit too forward even for one who likes singers close to the microphone.'