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 63

post #931 of 3714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Sarvis
Two more 3's in the queue - both on SACD: Zander (based on Mark from HFR's recommendation) is on order, and MTT (since I really like 1 and 9 from him), just arrived. I've listened to the MTT and was really impressed - especially with movement one. The mezzo is not my favorite, but still nice. Will report on further listening.
I've got both of these, for me MTT offers a more exciting interpretation, but the Zander has very impressive sound. I'm also fond of Lopez-Cobos/Cincinnatti and, last but centainly not least, Bernstein/NYPO (Sony).
post #932 of 3714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark from HFR
Doc,

Can't wait to hear what you think of the Zander 3. How is the MTT 9? If I ever find time to finish thw two reviews I'm working on this week, I'm diving into that next.

M
The jury's still out on the MTT 9 for me. Over the years I've come to believe that a Mahler performance either makes an emotional connection with the listener or it doesn't, and one's view of a particular symphony is colored by which performances first made that connection. For me, the M9 performance that first "clicked" back in the day was Bernstein/NYP. So, I haven't heard the MTT enough to reach that emotional connection. It'll take a few more listenings for me to be sure what I think. I'm expecting to like it, since MTT is my favorite 3 overall (Zander's still not arrived, though!), and one of my favorite 1's.

I will say this though: The sonics on the MTT 9 are stunning. All of the MTTs have such an amazing dynamic range. Having said this, does anyone else notice that they all seem to be recorded at a lower-than-average level, requiring you to turn up the volume more than normal? Could that be the lack of compression?

Speaking of sound, I think the best-sounding 3 I've ever heard is Boulez on SACD. Any thoughts on that?
post #933 of 3714
I haven't heard the Boulez M3, but for sound quality alone, the chailly M3 and M9 in SACD really was the best I had heard. I think it also beats the MTT for sound quality as well.
post #934 of 3714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunnyears
I haven't heard the Boulez M3, but for sound quality alone, the chailly M3 and M9 in SACD really was the best I had heard. I think it also beats the MTT for sound quality as well.
I agree about the Chailly 3 & 9, both excellent performances combined with wonderful soon. Both are Homeruns in my book as well (I also have the M2 from this series, while good with great sound, not as good as the M3 and M9, IMHO).

Scott
post #935 of 3714
Speasking of the Zander Telarc series: I have only been able to find 3,5, and 6 listed on SACD. Are there others in hi-rez?
post #936 of 3714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Sarvis
The jury's still out on the MTT 9 for me. Over the years I've come to believe that a Mahler performance either makes an emotional connection with the listener or it doesn't, and one's view of a particular symphony is colored by which performances first made that connection. For me, the M9 performance that first "clicked" back in the day was Bernstein/NYP. So, I haven't heard the MTT enough to reach that emotional connection. It'll take a few more listenings for me to be sure what I think. I'm expecting to like it, since MTT is my favorite 3 overall (Zander's still not arrived, though!), and one of my favorite 1's.

I will say this though: The sonics on the MTT 9 are stunning. All of the MTTs have such an amazing dynamic range. Having said this, does anyone else notice that they all seem to be recorded at a lower-than-average level, requiring you to turn up the volume more than normal? Could that be the lack of compression?

Speaking of sound, I think the best-sounding 3 I've ever heard is Boulez on SACD. Any thoughts on that?

I just turned down the lights, turned up the volume, and listened again to the MTT 9 in its entirety. To say that an "emotional connection" was made is an understatement. The final movement left me in tears. An amazing, deeply moving interpretation in unbelievable sound to boot. Recommended.
post #937 of 3714
Doc,

I'm so glad that you enjoyed the recording. I loved it too, even if it can't take the place of Ancerl's 9th (mostly because of the slow moving early movements). I ranked it as my co-favorite, and it takes a lot to get to that point with me.
post #938 of 3714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Sarvis
Speasking of the Zander Telarc series: I have only been able to find 3,5, and 6 listed on SACD. Are there others in hi-rez?
Doc,

The 9th was the first in the series to be recorded, and it was not recorded in hi-res. The 4th (according to the small print) was recorded in hi-res, but as far as I know, it has never been released in hi-res. If I get a free moment today, I'll see if I can get hold of Amanda at Telarc and ask her if the 4 will ever be released in hi-res. Zander's M1 is due to be released this fall.

Cheers,
Mark
post #939 of 3714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunnyears
I haven't heard the Boulez M3, but for sound quality alone, the chailly M3 and M9 in SACD really was the best I had heard. I think it also beats the MTT for sound quality as well.
I haven't heard the Boulez or the Chailly M3's yet. After extensively listening to all my 3's for the Zander review, I was about 3ed out for a while. Have to check them out soon.

M
post #940 of 3714

Mahler thoughts

I began thinking about the M3 after listening to Brahms' symphony no.1 in c minor. In the last movement, the Brahms modulates into the major and introduces that lovely, lyrical theme in the strings. The melody comes as a ray of sunshine percolating through storm clouds, a reminder of the positive aspects of life in the midst of difficulties. (Similarities to Haydn's Creation and Beethoven's Ode to Joy have frequently been remarked.) I had heard Mahler described as sarcastic and ironic, and had always understood that it referred to his use of earlier composers' themes in strange and difficult ways, but until I was listening to the Brahms it had never hit me exactly how bitter and angry Mahler could be. In his Symphony No. 3 he took that theme from Brahms, put it into the minor key, arranged it for brass and thus turned it on its head! No longer lyrical, pastoral, and above all optimistic, it becomes a bitter and pessimistic martial theme better suited for soldiers goose-stepping down avenues in the most militaristic of parades. Mahler then worked the development (still in the major) into other places in the first movement, and you can hear it every so often poking itself out like daisies and chamomile sprouting from cracks in the pavement of a run down city street. The symphony is at once an hommage and a satire of Brahms!

So many have described Mahler as the last composer in the 19th century romantic tradition, but I think they have missed the point. Mahler is the first true composer of the industrial age. He rips off the veneer of the pastoral that all of the 19th century romantic artists pasted over the ugliness of the industrial revolution and makes all of the music of the 20th century possible. Where the Romantics are heroic, Mahler is anti-heroic: just remember those mortal hammer blows of his sixth symphony. Mahler has been described as a composer in the Arte Nouveau style (Jugendstil), and with the way his melodies fragment and reform, they create a dense surface tapestry in which one can see similarities to the work of artists such as Klimt. If however, I have to compare Mahler to anything, then it has to be to Picasso's Les Demoiselles D'Avignon and its fractured and bitter surface and the new stream of consciousness writing style pioneered by James Joyce, especially in Ulysses (which coincidentally is about a Jew in the Catholic milieu of Dublin). For me, Mahler's music is not merely the culmination of 19th century romanticism so much as it's deathknell.
post #941 of 3714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunnyears
For me, Mahler's music is not merely the culmination of 19th century romanticism so much as it's deathknell.
Eloquent post, Bunny! I think Mahler is not so much of the past or of the future as he is the keystone of the arch that runs from one to the other.

One thought, though, on the Brahms tie-in. Do you think Mahler was completely aware of what he was doing, or that he just did it unintentionally? I remember reading something once where Mahler got very upset and rushed out of the room when someone remarked that the opening of his 5th echoed the "Kleine Apell" passage from the first movement of the 4th. That makes it sound as if he hadn't realized that he was borrowing from himself and didn't make a conscious echo from one work to the other.

Mark
post #942 of 3714
Mark,

I really can't begin to speculate as to whether Mahler did this consciously or not. I remember reading somewhere that when someone remarked about the similarities between Brahms' maestoso from the same first symphony and Beethoven's ninth, Brahms remarked something to the effect that even an idiot could see that. The tradition of borrowing themes (or tunes as we would call them now) from other composers, folksongs, etc. in music is very old. It is only in the most recent times that composers or songwriters start suing others over the use of their melodies rather than understanding that in the long music tradition, themes and variations by other composers are really an hommage. Beethoven, Handel, Mozart -- all borrowed from each other. I have the Pentatone Classics SACD/hybrid of Corelli Concerti Grossi (New Dutch Academy/Simon Murphy) that includes on its last track the Fuga a Quattro Voci, Allegro that will sound familiar to everyone who has ever had to sing the Hallelujah chorus. It is the same motif that Handel uses for the words: "For the Lord God ominipotent reigneth!" And the vocal fugue also owes a debt to the Corelli or vice-versa. Who knows who really dreamed it up first? Or maybe they both used something from another composer. We need a really astute and knowledgable music historian for these issues.

As to Mahler being upset about borrowing from himself? Well, for someone who used his song cycles as starting points for his symphonies (just compare the Lieder eines fahrenden Gesellen to the Symphony No.1 (Titan)), that story seems a bit strange! For all we know, Mahler might have been upset by something other than what the person telling the anecdote understood. Afterall, it might have just been an extreme example of the "even a dummkopf could see that" reaction! Duh!

Bunny
post #943 of 3714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark from HFR
Eloquent post, Bunny! I think Mahler is not so much of the past or of the future as he is the keystone of the arch that runs from one to the other.

Mark
Well put.. I definately see Mahler as a major, if not *the* major bridge between, basically, everything that came before him, and every thing that followed. The musical atom had not yet been split until he came along, so to speak. After Mahler, possibilities suddenly seemed endless, whereas before you pretty much had one long, slightly wandering path. Sure, Brahms and Dvorak and Bruckner all had their own things to say. But they were all part of the path that led to Mahler.

Mahler spoke of including the world in symphony. He was the first to truly accomplish that. I think Lenny said it best, if any of you have missed this Essay ("His Time Has Come"), please read it. It's one of the best writings on Mahler I've ever come across. I first read it in original CBS CD release of his Mahler 3rd.. an exerpt:

This dual vision of Mahler’s, which tore him apart all his life, is the vision we have finally come to perceive in his music. This is what Mahler meant when he said, “My time will come.” It is only after fifty, sixty, seventy years of world holocausts, of the simultaneous advance of democracy with our increasing inability to stop making war, of the simultaneous magnification of national pieties with intensification of our active resistance to social equality – only after we have experienced all this through the smoking ovens of Auschwitz, the frantically bombed jungles of Vietnam, through Hungary, Suez, the Bay of Pigs, the farce-trial of Sinyavsky and Daniel, the refueling of the Nazi machine, the murder in Dallas, the arrogance of South Africa, the Hiss-Chambers travesty, the Trotzkyite purges, Black Power, Red Guards, the Arab encirclement of Israel, the plague of McCarthyism, the Tweedledum armament race – only after all this can we finally listen to Mahler’s music and understand that it foretold all. And in the foretelling it showered a rain of beauty on this world that has not been equaled since.


http://memes.org/modules.php?op=modl...ticle&sid=2247

-jar
post #944 of 3714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Masonjar
Well put.. I definately see Mahler as a major, if not *the* major bridge between, basically, everything that came before him, and every thing that followed. The musical atom had not yet been split until he came along, so to speak. After Mahler, possibilities suddenly seemed endless, whereas before you pretty much had one long, slightly wandering path. Sure, Brahms and Dvorak and Bruckner all had their own things to say. But they were all part of the path that led to Mahler.

Mahler spoke of including the world in symphony. He was the first to truly accomplish that. I think Lenny said it best, if any of you have missed this Essay ("His Time Has Come"), please read it. It's one of the best writings on Mahler I've ever come across. I first read it in original CBS CD release of his Mahler 3rd.. an exerpt:

This dual vision of Mahler’s, which tore him apart all his life, is the vision we have finally come to perceive in his music. This is what Mahler meant when he said, “My time will come.” It is only after fifty, sixty, seventy years of world holocausts, of the simultaneous advance of democracy with our increasing inability to stop making war, of the simultaneous magnification of national pieties with intensification of our active resistance to social equality – only after we have experienced all this through the smoking ovens of Auschwitz, the frantically bombed jungles of Vietnam, through Hungary, Suez, the Bay of Pigs, the farce-trial of Sinyavsky and Daniel, the refueling of the Nazi machine, the murder in Dallas, the arrogance of South Africa, the Hiss-Chambers travesty, the Trotzkyite purges, Black Power, Red Guards, the Arab encirclement of Israel, the plague of McCarthyism, the Tweedledum armament race – only after all this can we finally listen to Mahler’s music and understand that it foretold all. And in the foretelling it showered a rain of beauty on this world that has not been equaled since.


http://memes.org/modules.php?op=modl...ticle&sid=2247

-jar
Excellent analogy! and thank you for the link to the essay; even if I find his view of history slightly off the mark, his insights into the music really score.
post #945 of 3714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunnyears

As to Mahler being upset about borrowing from himself? Well, for someone who used his song cycles as starting points for his symphonies (just compare the Lieder eines fahrenden Gesellen to the Symphony No.1 (Titan)), that story seems a bit strange! For all we know, Mahler might have been upset by something other than what the person telling the anecdote understood. Afterall, it might have just been an extreme example of the "even a dummkopf could see that" reaction! Duh!

Bunny
Yes, the story is odd, but I swear I didn't make it up! You're probably right about his reaction, because it's pretty obvious that the "Kleine Appel" leads right to the opening of the 5th. Perhaps the person who said it was an annoying person, so he left. Not that Mahler ever had extreme reactions to anything!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Music
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › Mahler Symphonies Favorite Recordings