It is good when record companies couple a Haydn symphony with a nick-name, i.e. a well-known one, with one that is neglected simply because it has no sobriquet. In this instance No. 88 in G is quite as fine as the well-known Oxford but is comparatively neglected. It is one of the three works Haydn entrusted to Tost, an ex-Esterhaza violinist with whom he was on good terms (Tost was going to Paris and was to negotiate their sale but I shouldn't think the two remained on good terms since Tost tried to swindle the composer out of the money for the deal).
Whether Bernstein's apparent use of all of the strings of the VPO is a good thing is doubtful; and whether DG's characteristic rich and well-cushioned recording is also a good thing for Haydn's music is also doubtful. However, in their way both symphonies get good performances, for the VPO is a marvellous orchestra and its strings make a very warm sound; and though the texture is reasonably clear (it is in the loud, rushing tuttis that detail is lost in the hurly-burly) you have only to listen to the Bournemouth sinfonietta, a band of ideal size for Haydn and to CRD's recording, crystal clear in comparison, to understand my doubts. Bernstein repeats both halves of the first movement of No. 88, a repeat probably justified by the quite long slow movement that follows. This is given a rather romantic treatment and is made even longer by Bernstein's slow tempo. Listen to Ronald Thomas and you will hear that though the sound is very different, his performance is not lacking in expressiveness. the minuet from Bernstein is admirably bucolic in its earthy bounce; but I prefer Thomas's quicker view and the life he brings to the whole thing. Bernstein's Trio is again slightly romantically expressed. The finale bubbles in both versions. (That delightful passage from bar 142 is sheer fun from both conductors.
There is far less difference between the two versions of the Oxford Symphony, though Davis's benefits from his ability to get his woodwind playing in such an eager style; it also benefits, I think, from Philips's very clear and less full recording. By the way, both conductors repeat the second half of the Trio, not marked in my Robbins Landon Haydn Society edition. No doubt both think that as the repeat was an absolutely regular thing the omission from the score was an oversight of Haydn's. Both, anyway, deviate from that score in several slight points that are so minor they are not worthy detailing. Davis couples the Oxford with No. 91.'