[FinnishFlash]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Facade19 /img/forum/go_quote.gif My newest Mahler recordings arrived today. Solti's 1st and 2nd readings with the LSO and Barenboim's 7th. Oh my goodness, does Solti's 2nd sound incredible. The acoustics IMO are simple fantastic. The engineers at DECCA outdid themselves to my ears. Solti's reading is simple fantastic. Of the four recordings of the 2nd I have (Mehta, VPO, Bertini/RSOK, Abbado/CSO and now Solti/LSO) I have to say that the Solti has become my favorite. Of course there is still the Bernstein/NPO to get, but dang it with the Solti and Mehta versions I do not think I need another one for a long time.

I agree, the Solti LSO is fabulous and also my favourite M2 at the moment. The newly issued Decca Originals mid-price stand-alone M2 is probably one of the best Mahler deals available at the moment. For it to be the perfect M2 for me, I would wish only for slightly better recorded brass and a bit more punch in the closing pages. I suppose this would point in the direction of the Solti/CSO set...

 

[JayG]

Quote:

Originally Posted by scompton /img/forum/go_quote.gif He even conducts Mahler's reochestrations of Beethoven's symphonies which brings howls from the local critics. He's done it enough that even when he conducts straight Beethoven, the critics howl that it's too much like Mahler. That happened this year when he conducted the 9th and had a talk afterwards which the critic must have skipped. He explained his interpretation followed the score and that he tried to increase the tempo towards what some HIP interpretations are doing.

It doesn't matter what he said he did if that's not what the critic heard. I hope you wouldn't want the writer to write that the performance must have been true to the score and quick moving just because Slatkin said so.

I wasn't there, so I have no idea what it really sounded like. Who was right, Slatkin or the critic?

-Jay

 

[scompton]

I don't know enough to tell the difference, or else it was a fast version of Beethoven's score. I tend to trust Slatkin and 2 of the singers who were on the stage after the show giving the talk, but your guess is as good as mine. Slatkin did say that the previous time the NSO played the 9th, it was Mahler's reorchestration.

BTW, does anyone know why Mahler reorchestrated Beethoven's symphonies? Was it just an exercise or did he think he could improve them? I have read that some later composers thought they could improve Schumann's symphonies.

 

[kerelybonto]

Did anyone else see Iván Fischer conduct the NSO in Mahler's second last night? I walked away impressed despite having been somewhat displeased after the first movement.

The performance was odd, at least to me, from the start because Fischer drew some extended, dramatic pauses in the opening and then in various places throughout. I also thought the attack on the sforzandi of strings was too slow, and they just didn't reach high enough. There was a sort of fluidity both to the tempo and to the dynamics that I thought sapped the intensity from the first movement, which in places I think is really supposed to be downright frightening.

That fluidity worked wonders on the lyrical passages though, which I though were very well done. The last three movements I thought were excellent. I don't know if things changed or I was just used to the style by then, but the finale was splendid, with super intensity down the strech. Anyway, as I said, I walked away thinking it had been quite a good show despite my intial reaction.

I have not heard any of Fischer's recordings. I know his M2 he recorded in Budapest got some praise though. I looked back in this thread a bit to see what people thought about his Mahler and his M2 in particular any saw some mixed things. Anybody want to add anything?

 

[mbhaub]

His M2 is just about at the top of my list. Superbly played and conducted. The recording is without peer. The only oddity is slight heaviness on the downbeats in the second movement, emphasizing the landler nature of the piece. It is not a hell-bent-for-leather reading, it's more controlled than say Solti or Bernstein. His M6 is also a top contender.

 

[scompton]

I was there and I really enjoyed it. I'm not familiar enough with it to offer any critique. I will say that the crescendo at the end was about as loud as I've ever heard an orchestra play. Very close to my pain threshold. I don't know how they stand it on stage, especially the chorus in front of the organ pipes

I was in row DD, pretty much in the center. The sound was great, but I've decided I like being in the balcony better. You really don't get much of a view from the orchestra and I like watching the musicians, especially the percussionists.

I was thinking today that my favorite Mahler symphony is the last one I heard live

On another topic, my Konrashin set arrived today. I've never received a more well packed CD. It was wrapped in bubble wrap. Double sided tape was applied to the bubble wrap and slabs of styrofoam were put on that. It was then wrapped with cardboard that was completely covered with packing tape. Over that more double sided tape and brown paper. Then the whole thing tied with twine. It took me a good 50 minutes just to get it open. I haven't had time to listen yet and I'm really looking forward to it.

 

[Tyson]

Ordered the Mahler 3 by Levine from my library. Got it today, put it in and was pretty underwhelmed. Took a closer look at the case and it wasn't Levine - the sent me the MTT with the LSO. B@stards!

 

[FinnishFlash]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbhaub /img/forum/go_quote.gif His M2 is just about at the top of my list. Superbly played and conducted. The recording is without peer. The only oddity is slight heaviness on the downbeats in the second movement, emphasizing the landler nature of the piece. It is not a hell-bent-for-leather reading, it's more controlled than say Solti or Bernstein.

Although I am a bit reserved myself, I can see why you and many others like the Fischer M2 so much. I find myself admiring the recording more than loving it, however. I guess what I as a relative Mahler newbie look for in a M2 is more of that "hell-bent-for-leather" quality than what Fischer has to offer.

By the way, I received my used copy of the Mitropoulos/Cologne M6 on Great Conductors today. I only had time to listen to the first movement, but was immediately blown away by what I heard. The intensity and power of Mitropoulos' first movement is almost unbearable and makes my (previous) reference Bernstein/VPO (DG) seem almost sedate... It's easy to see why DA and Tyson like it so much, they just don't make 'em like that anymore...!

 

[Tyson]

Can you imagine Bernstein's mindset when he took over in New York after Mitropoulos had made a career of performances like that. Must have been pretty intimidating.

 

[mbhaub]

Not for backstabbing Lenny. He was in many ways a monster. Mitropoulos did so much to help Bernstein get a career started, offered him so much, yet when it came down to it, Bernstein couldn't wait to turn on his mentor very cruelly. The saddest thing was Bernstein mocking the elder conductor's homosexuality, when Bernstein himself was deeply closeted at this time. Bernstein always spoke like it was he, and he alone, who brought Mahler to New York, completely ignoring the significant work of Mitropoulos, Rodzkinski, Walter and others. Bernstein was something of an egomaniac: not with reason, to be sure. It's sad, really, how badly he treated Mitropoulos, yet worshipped the vastly inferior Koussevitsky until the end. The bio on Mitropoulos (The Priest of Music) lays it all out pretty well.

 

[davisac]

from the few ones ive listened to Bernstein and Rattle seem to have the best. but I dont know alot about this stuff

 

[pbarach]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbhaub /img/forum/go_quote.gif Bernstein was something of an egomaniac: not with reason, to be sure. It's sad, really, how badly he treated Mitropoulos, yet worshipped the vastly inferior Koussevitsky until the end.

Bernstein's personality aside, Mitropoulos and Koussevitsky both had their strong and weak points. Also, they produced strikingly different kinds of orchestral sound with the orchestras they each worked with the longest. Unfortunately, neither of them typically got recorded sound that did justice to what their work sounded like in the concert hall. To me, you are comparing different musical approaches and it makes no sense to say one was "inferior" to the other. This is no different than saying Toscanini is "inferior" to Furtwaengler, or Edwin Fischer is "inferior" to Schnabel, etc.

 

[mbhaub]

Mitropoulos was a superbly gifted musician. He was a first-class virtuoso pianist, a conducting technic that allowed him to do the most thorny and difficult 20th century scores, and an internal ear that allowed him to learn scores and rehearse effectively. Koussevitsky was a virtuoso string bass player. He had no "ears". His conducting technic was non-existent. He couldn't make heads or tails out of complex scores. Even Bernstein admitted that Koussy found things like Rite of Spring impossible to conduct. What he did well was conduct from the heart, corny it may sound. Be he instinctively knew how music should go. But with that came a certain slackness of accuracy that is easily heard in his recordings. Still, I wouldn't be without his Prokofiev 5th or Tchaikovsky 6th for anything.

 

[PSmith08]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbhaub /img/forum/go_quote.gif Mitropoulos was a superbly gifted musician. He was a first-class virtuoso pianist, a conducting technic that allowed him to do the most thorny and difficult 20th century scores, and an internal ear that allowed him to learn scores and rehearse effectively. Koussevitsky was a virtuoso string bass player. He had no "ears". His conducting technic was non-existent. He couldn't make heads or tails out of complex scores. Even Bernstein admitted that Koussy found things like Rite of Spring impossible to conduct. What he did well was conduct from the heart, corny it may sound. Be he instinctively knew how music should go. But with that came a certain slackness of accuracy that is easily heard in his recordings. Still, I wouldn't be without his Prokofiev 5th or Tchaikovsky 6th for anything.

Mitropoulos' reputation, too, after the fact, really doesn't get the needed and deserved boost. His searing Das Buch mit sieben Siegeln, from 1959 (I've only heard parts on one occasion, but they made an impression), is OOP at least in the States, and it doesn't look like it will be reentering the market. His 1956 Don Giovanni, too, shows the marks of greatness. A 1955 Brahms first piano concerto is not without substantial charms.

Nothing needs to be said about either of his famous Mahler 6ths.

No, Mitropoulos seems to be one of those conductors forgotten by the establishment. A shame, too, since he was one of the best.

 

[mbhaub]

I think there's an explanation, but one that makes some people uncomfortable: he was gay, and not too shy about it. But in the 50's, that was just unacceptable in WASP America. Bernstein hid it carefully. The other thing working against DM was that he died too early, and didn't leave enough of a stereo legacy. There were many superb conductors before stereo, but modern listeners don't want mono and won't buy it. Those of us who are more interested in music than sound can listen through the older mono sound. The likes of Mitropoulos, Rodzinski, Furtwangler, E. Kleiber, and many others will be forgotten in not too many more years as fewer and fewer music lovers are interested in ancient sound. Who wants to put dim, distorted mono on their iPod?

As to the Mitropoulos Schmidt Das Buch, yes that is a searing reading. Someday, I'm sure it will reappear. I have the Sony version and the Melodram. The former sounds better. But then there's a new one, on Chandos, that is simply a knockout. Sacd surrround sound and all. Very powerful reading, and in my mind blows all the competitors out of the water. It's what Welser-Most's should have been. Harnoncourt is no match. It's hard to believe that this work is so obscure in the US, yet there are now NINE CD versions.