or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › Mahler Symphonies Favorite Recordings
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mahler Symphonies Favorite Recordings - Page 179

post #2671 of 3714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunnyears
Conductors also like to fool around with tempos in order to make original contributions to performance traditions; there's no way they can change the notes without a lot of protest. That's why people like me collect multiple sets of Mahler, Beethoven, Mozart, Handel, Strauss, Schubert, Haydn, Stravinsky, Rachmaninoff, Prokofieff, Shostakovich, MartinĂș, Nielsen, Grieg, Sibelius, Bach, Telemann, Copland, Harris, Glass, Dvorak, ...
i'll blame them too for my future multiple purchases
post #2672 of 3714
Sorry about your wallet!
post #2673 of 3714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunnyears
Papy,

that's a pretty good analogy. Then again there are also the composers who will count this way:

12...3......4|1.2.3.4|...123..4|

The count within each bar of music is not always played exactly as written which is why it can get so interesting or downright annoying.
Sure makes it very interesting, if not a tad unsettling too....

From a beginner's point of view, i find myself rightly or wrongly getting used to the first version I hear, then the next one would seem totally incorrect and inappropiate, until the next one that comes along brings all down to rumbles and appears to be definitive (e.g. one of my favorite, Schubert 8th : Halasz's to start with, good and with bit of pace, then Menuhin's slooooow and boring, then Kleiber's, powerful and galloping)...

it's all fun....
post #2674 of 3714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunnyears
Sorry about your wallet!
Head-fi and GMG sure help me with my problems !!
post #2675 of 3714
is mahler romantic music like brahms and tchaikovsky?
post #2676 of 3714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oistrakh
is mahler romantic music like brahms and tchaikovsky?
yes, but stretched to the extreme.

Extreme in length, orchestral forces, dynamic range, emotional twists, and to the breaking point of traditional tonality.

yes, it's everything you love about Brahams, Tchakovsky, Dvorak, etc.. but.. more of it...

After Mahler, they threw away the book, so to speak, and started over. They had to invent new musical languages, because Mahler just about said all that could be said with the language that folks like Bach, Mozart and Beethoven developed..

I'd start at the beginning, with a good performance of the Mahler 1st and go from there. I'd suggest Sir Georg Solti or Claudio Abbado.

-jar
post #2677 of 3714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oistrakh
is mahler romantic music like brahms and tchaikovsky?
Mahler falls into the Late Romantic movement, but he's like no one but himself. He stands alone.
post #2678 of 3714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Masonjar
I'd start at the beginning, with a good performance of the Mahler 1st and go from there. I'd suggest Sir Georg Solti or Claudio Abbado.

-jar
such I get like discs that only have one or two symphonies or the entire set?
post #2679 of 3714
Quote:
Originally Posted by papy
Sure makes it very interesting, if not a tad unsettling too....

From a beginner's point of view, i find myself rightly or wrongly getting used to the first version I hear, then the next one would seem totally incorrect and inappropiate...
it's all fun....
You have no idea how correct you are!
The first Mahler 7th I ever heard was Bernstein's on a Columbia LP. Since then, every 7th is still judged by that standard. I can read the score and find so many faults in conducting and playing. I know some recordings are much more accurate. But because Bernstein's was the first to burn its image in the mind, it is the standard. Many collectors always keep an allegiance to their first whatever, often for no good reason other than "that's the way I like it". Very, very, very difficult rut to break -- and indeed is the reason many of us do collect huge libraries with tremendous redundancy. I obstinately maintain that the way to do Haydn is Dorati's. That almost anything Fritz Reiner recorded is the way it has to be! But that's because their's were the first recordings I ever owned of the music. (And in Reiner's case, not far off the mark, either.)

I have a ritual: every Sunday night I listen to the Elgar 2nd. To prevent boredom and to keep it alive, I put on a different version every week until I have to start over. How else can I explain (or justify) owning 27 versions of that beloved work?
post #2680 of 3714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oistrakh
such I get like discs that only have one or two symphonies or the entire set?
Given your posting history I'm surprised you don't have an opinion on this already!
post #2681 of 3714

New Thoughts on Mahler 8

Having listened to Mahler 8 a lot more lately (due in no small measure to this thread), I've started to see new aspects to it (I've always loved the piece, but now my appreciation for it is deepening). Two observations:

1. I see it now as the ultimate expression of Romantic music. I think that's what Mahler intended it to be: A culmination, the grandest Romantic spectacle imaginable (and perhaps his way of saying farewell to the Romantic genre). Even the subject matter (Faust, the greatest 19th century work of all) fits this idea.

2. It's unique in Mahler's canon in that it was meant to be a spectacle - that's why he composed it, to honor the romantic "creator spirit". In other words, unlike his other stuff, there is no angst-ridden message underneath. That's what makes it unique, and why many Mahler fans don't like it.

Just a few thoughts in passing on a Tuesday night...
post #2682 of 3714
hey, guess what ! another silly question !

Now i have understood why the timings are different, they (i.e. the conductors) decide to mess up with my mind and mix the movements around !!! Flipping heck, as if that wasn't confusing enough :

Take the M6 :

Abbado/BPO/DG


1. Allegro Energico
2. Andante Moderato
3. Scherzo
4. Finale - Allegro Moderato

and now from the Bertini box set

CD 7
1. Allegro Energico
2. Scherzo
3. Andante Moderato

CD 8
Finale - Allegro Moderato

so, i thought :

typo ? no, the tracks are indeed in their respective order as indicated on their respective sets.
space issue on the bertini ? can't be, because 2. and 3. only are swapped, and are on the same disk...

Did either Bertini or Abbado take even more liberties with the score ?!?!?!

what gives ?

Thanks,

Papy


PS :
Bertini's andante - 16'16
Abbado's andante - 13'57
glad i asked yesterday...lol
post #2683 of 3714
Hi Papy,

You have really found an interesting thing about Mahler's 6th. When Mahler first wrote it, he placed the scherzo in 2nd position but then when it came time to conduct it, he changed the order, conducting the Andante second and the Scherzo third. He also scored the finale for 3 hammerblows but in performance, he was so emotionally overwrought at the idea of 3 blows, that he changed that to 2 hammerblows. For whatever reasons he made these changes, when the final critical edition was published, the Scherzo had been returned to the second position while the third hammerblow remained excised.

Thus, performances of the M6, unlike any of his other symphonies is really up to the conductor with respect to the order of the inner movements and the number of hammerblows. I prefer the Scherzo in its more classic 2nd position but others feel that Mahler was correct in changing the order. So, Mitropoulos, Bernstein, Oué, Levi, and most others play it with the Scherzo second and only 2 blows while Abbado and Ivan Fischer play the Andante second. And many others will include that 3rd hammerblow -- Zander in fact recorded the last movement with 2 and 3 blows. He just couldn't make up his mind so he did it both ways and tells the listener to pick the version he prefers.
post #2684 of 3714
Quote:
Originally Posted by papy
hey, guess what ! another silly question !

Now i have understood why the timings are different, they (i.e. the conductors) decide to mess up with my mind and mix the movements around !!! Flipping heck, as if that wasn't confusing enough :

Take the M6 :

Abbado/BPO/DG


1. Allegro Energico
2. Andante Moderato
3. Scherzo
4. Finale - Allegro Moderato

and now from the Bertini box set

CD 7
1. Allegro Energico
2. Scherzo
3. Andante Moderato

CD 8
Finale - Allegro Moderato

so, i thought :

typo ? no, the tracks are indeed in their respective order as indicated on their respective sets.
space issue on the bertini ? can't be, because 2. and 3. only are swapped, and are on the same disk...

Did either Bertini or Abbado take even more liberties with the score ?!?!?!

what gives ?

Thanks,

Papy


PS :
Bertini's andante - 16'16
Abbado's andante - 13'57
glad i asked yesterday...lol
Actually, it's never been clear in M6 which should go first, the scherzo or the andante. Mahler himself reportedly could not decide. Alma (his widow) established the current performance practice by calling for the scherzo first (I think), but now there are a new crop of anti-Alma Mahlerians who perform it the other way.

The other issue surrounds how many hammer blows are sounded in the final movement. Most sound only two (as Mahler eventually preferred) but a few still sound three (as Mahler originally wrote the score). There is a whole story about Mahler's reason for this change, involving his "tempting fate" with the music...

Stuff like this is part of what makes multiple Mahler recordings so much fun...

P.S. If you get the Zander M6 on Telarc, the discussion disc that accompanies it has a detailed look at the confusing performance history of M6, and even has two recordings of the final moverment - one with 2 hammer blows, and one with three.
post #2685 of 3714
And speaking of Zander, his argument as to the placement of Scherzo-Andante is about as solid, simple, and powerful as can be made.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Music
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › Mahler Symphonies Favorite Recordings