[Yikes]

Getting ready to leave for the city for the 5th. Wow! you guy's amaze me. You guy's know so much more about the conductors and performances. Your ability to analyze and evaluate the preformances is quite impressive. I love Mahler, but I just enjoy the performances. I suppose that I'm not that deep of a Classical music thinker

Enjoy the concert.

 

[Bunnyears]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidMahler /img/forum/go_quote.gif Now the 4th tonight was so far the best conducted and performed work of the series thus far. No one can tell me that tonight wasn't extremely EXTREMELY special. Roschmann is genius....perfect for Wunderhorn and the 4th finale. Boulez's conducting was near-perfect throughout. I am so overwhelmed with happiness about this night The 3rd was in my opinion a very competent performance, didn't blow me away, but didn't let me down like the 2nd. I feel the 2nd Symphony possesses something which Boulez's musical vision does not and will never have. This is not his fault as I feel no conductor is perfectly suited for all of Mahler's works.... For me, Mahler's 2nd is the one symphony which needs to be "interpreted" the most. The manuscript is a tremendous guide, but if you spend your time following it and being completely faithful, then you're missing the greatest element of the symphony......the Resurrection symphony requires the conductor to bring his emotions and soul and not keep them in check. Boulez didn't have that for me whatsoever. However JayG, please don't like mine or Bunny's opinion of the performance have any effect on your memory of it....everyone hears music differently. The 2nd Symphony is so brilliant so overwhelming, so large in scope that it would be impossible for any conductor to destroy its integrity and beauty if they had a great orchestra which the Berlin Staatskapelle is.......I felt bad for that very bad trumpet blunder from the offstage horn, that was highly distracting. And there were two old ladies sitting next to me having a cough contest when the choir entered, i got pissed. I thought the movement Boulez handled best of the Resurrection was actually the 2nd movement, maybe the 3rd was great too. The first movement was not intense enough and the last movement didn't overwhelm me either. DeYoung and Roschmann are truly magnificent. I was slightly disappointed in Quasthoff....I get mildly turned off by singers who read the manuscript while singing, so maybe I was biased. Bunny, I'd love to meet up, but it would be so much easier for me to meet after the show unless its a weekend, because I'm coming from work and I'm always with a different friend. Let me know when is good for you You also let me know Jay. -Dave

I'd pm you but your box is full.

After is as good as before for me.

Btw, Bruce Hodges liked the 2nd so Jay, you are not in bad company. Check out his twitter link.

I felt that the 2nd was not successful except for the Urlicht and Finale -- both helped by the soloists and choruses. The 4th was probably as good as the 3rd, maybe marginally better except for the beginning which was slightly rushed. Nicht Schlepend, indeed! with vengeance. more later!

 

[DavidMahler]

Everyone who saw the 5th today will probably agree with me that it was the best performance of the series thus far. I'm going to skip ahead hear to the important part, the Adagietto. This was not only best Adagietto I've ever heard live, but probably the best played and most well paced Adagietto I've ever heard period. I was simply blown away, speechless for at least 20 minutes after the symphony ended. I really hope it comes out on CD. Barenboim's recording of the 5th with CSO was not nearly as good as today. My praise for the interpretation doesn't end at the Adagietto. The whole symphony was just AMAZING. I saw Mariss Jansons do it with the Concertgebouw last year at Carnegie Hall. It didn't even compare.

I still stand by the fact that Boulez did wonderfully with the 4th, However, on listening to the 3rd today, I changed my opinion about Boulez's performance. It wasn't great enough for me to feel blown away...I forgot how much that symphony can blow me away.

So far I'd rank the interpretations

Symphony 5 by a significant margin
Symphony 4
Symphony 1
Symphony 3
Symphony 2........terrible

 

[Yikes]

I didn't catch this cycles 1st and 2nd, but I'd have to agree that Barenboim's 5th was truly exceptional. I was also blown away.

I hope that everyone enjoys the rest of the cycle.

 

[Bunnyears]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidMahler /img/forum/go_quote.gif Everyone who saw the 5th today will probably agree with me that it was the best performance of the series thus far. I'm going to skip ahead hear to the important part, the Adagietto. This was not only best Adagietto I've ever heard live, but probably the best played and most well paced Adagietto I've ever heard period. I was simply blown away, speechless for at least 20 minutes after the symphony ended. I really hope it comes out on CD. Barenboim's recording of the 5th with CSO was not nearly as good as today. My praise for the interpretation doesn't end at the Adagietto. The whole symphony was just AMAZING. I saw Mariss Jansons do it with the Concertgebouw last year at Carnegie Hall. It didn't even compare. I still stand by the fact that Boulez did wonderfully with the 4th, However, on listening to the 3rd today, I changed my opinion about Boulez's performance. It wasn't great enough for me to feel blown away...I forgot how much that symphony can blow me away. So far I'd rank the interpretations Symphony 5 by a significant margin Symphony 4 Symphony 1 Symphony 3 Symphony 2........terrible

Certainly the 2nd was the worst of the lot so far. Through out the first 3 there were problems with the brass section, but with only a minor biff in the fiendishly difficult posthorn solo (done off stage) in the 3rd, the brass seem to have gotten onto a better footing.

The M1 was an electrifying M1. I don't think I've heard as emotional and charged a reading as the one last Wednesday. It was, however, marred by some ragged play, especially by the brass which seemed to jump in too early in at least one place, and generally lacked ensemble as well. Even with that flaw, which would have been enough to sink a normal performance, that performance probably ranks as one of my top live Mahler experiences, and I've been listening to live Mahler for at least 40 years.

Some of the problems with the 2nd also rested on the shoulders of the brass section: they sounded wrong. Others have noted to me that the brass sounded out of tune with the rest of the orchestra. This does happen occasionally, but usually it's hard to notice because we will be talking about quarter tone variations of sharp or flat which become most apparent when the brass will come in with a short phrase or note to punctuate an orchestral phrase. Unfortunately, the brass were awful throughout 2nd, and that may have colored much of what we heard. But, Boulez just didn't seem to be sympathetic to what this symphony is all about.

Boulez may not be the greatest choice for this symphony. He is a meticulous conductor: he is elegant, but orderly, organized, and precise. Early Mahler to me is antithetical to such a mind, because despite the overly precise directions the composer has put on the score, the music demands someone more freewheeling. Mahler himself as a conductor was supposed to have been someone whose performances were never predictable, frequently ignoring his own notes for tempo and dynamics when conducting. The Mahler dilemma for a conductor is to determine just how far he can go without bringing the whole symphony down as a mishmash of disjointed and overly sentimentalized crap punctuated by episodes of stentorian pomposity. Zander never seems to find the right balance to me. Solti too many times exaggerated to the point of cartoonishness. Boulez, in the M3 delivered a measured, well considered, thoughtful performance that worked, but in the M2 missed the mark because it was too cautious. The M3 he led on Friday night may not have been his best M3, again there were minor problems with the brass (but not in the posthorn solo which had a only minor biff, but because of its fiendish difficulty is rarely performed live without problems), but the symphony which is difficult really came together logically and coherently. His coolness was balanced by by Ms. DeYoung, a terrific Mahlerian Mezzo, who supplied the heart for the work. (I can't wait to hear DLVE to see what she will do when lead by Barenboim.)

For my money, the M4 was really terrific -- almost perfect. Of all Mahler's symphonies, this is the one compared to Haydn, and I believe the one most suited to Boulez's elegant style. The opening was taken at a very fast clip, faster than in most of my recordings, but it worked. I always have felt that those opening bars should be taken at the pace of a team of horses trotting easily (yes in my youth I rode horses), but this opening was at the pace of trotters in one of the heats of the Hambletonian. By the time the strings joined in for the exposition of the first theme, however, it all came together, even the brass sections. The rest of the first movement sailed through easily, in a reading with the sparkle and clarity of crystal.

Kudos to the Concertmaster, whichever one it was as the program lists two, for an amazing scherzo. I'm always amazed at how he or she juggles the 2 violins without confusing them. And the Ruhevoll was ethereally beautiful, setting up the Lied perfectly. This is one part of Mahler where Boulez's inate elegance polished the work to an amazing degree. Then the song at the end was sung by Ms. Röschmann, who has as close to perfect a voice for this as I've heard. At first I was put off by her stage presence: that incredibly fussy blue satin dress and stole didn't work well with her animated singing for the Wunderhorn Lieder before the intermission, so I found myself listening while following the text rather than looking at her. By the time the third movement of the symphony ended, I didn't really notice the dress the same way.

Which brings me to yesterday's performance of the Mahler 5th. I was not surprised to find that Barenboim knows this symphony so well that he conducted it without the score. I had seen him do the same in Carnegie Hall with the Chicago Symphony in his farewell year. That was the Mahler 5th that burned itself into my consciousness. The one that we heard yesterday was magnificent, but only imagine it with the fantastic Chicago SO, and their amazing brass section. With Barenboim, every performance is of the moment so you know that you are never getting the same thing twice, and this was as true yesterday as it was 3 or 4 years ago. His Adagietto was sublime, and the finale was earth moving. I didn't expect the SKBerlin to be able to deliver on the same level as the Chicago SO, their earlier performances were not that inspiring, but Barenboim on the podium is a great factor: The SKB delivered a masterful Mahler 5th, with some of the best playing that they have done in this series. Right now, I have to say that Barenboim is probably one of the most exciting Mahler conductors around, and I just can't wait to hear his DLVE, his 7th, and his 9th. His recordings of those two symphonies, from live performances, are high on my list of favorite recordings, so I'm really looking forward to this week.

 

[vic225]

Any comments on Gergiev and Chailly's cycle?

 

[pow3rtr1p]

I want to hear some of them of CSO on SACD. Tilson-Thomas and SFO are releasing the whole cycle, I believe. On Youtube, they sounded really good for Mahler 7.

I can't for Barenboim to do the 7th. It's my favorite Mahler, most likely.

 

[vic225]

The SF Tilson-Thomas CDs are....... too expensive.. its around 50 bucks per cd in Canada if I remember correctly

 

[stokitw]

If price is an issue, just grab Chailly's boxset.
It is a well balanced set.

Tilson Thomas and Gergiev can wait.
The sound recording in Tilson Thomas' Mahler is superb.
But I do think MTT lacks some excitment.
Gergiev sometimes gives interesting reading (like his tense No.6), but the overall effect (sound and interpretation) does not reach to the higher level.

 

[Bunnyears]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vic225 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Any comments on Gergiev and Chailly's cycle?

Gergiev's orchestras (whichever they are, Kirov/Maryinsky, Vienna Phil, LSO, et al.) always play VERY LOUD. If you like loud music, then Gergiev is your man.

Chailly's cycle is very well balanced, more in the Kubelik style: lyrical, with the architecture very well delineated. Chailly's 3rd, 8th, and 9th are the standouts of his cycle, but he is strong in all of the symphonies. Royal Concertgebouw Orch of Amsterdam has a long history as a great Mahler band, and plays beautifully throughout. Recorded sound quality is excellent. Prices for the set are also very good. It's hard not to recommend this cycle. Weakest is probably the 2nd which is just misses the point and the 6th which seems to lack the necessary terror. Note: in the 2nd, Chailly has the strings using portamenti excessively, and while Mahler called for the use of portamenti, it just didn't play well to my ears. Chailly is a conductor that always is reading the scores very closely, and sometimes Mahler's music really needs someone willing to get into the music with his eyes closed. His tempos are not the fastest, but they are not overly slow. This is not a set for someone who wants the tempos on the faster side, however with so many solid and great interpretions the cycle ranks as one of the top modern cycles around. Chailly's recordings of some of the song cycles are also excellent.

 

[mbhaub]

Chailly is often glib, overpolished and pefunctory. There's nothing wrong per se: it's staggerling well played, the recording quality is second to none. But he misses something too often. The 2nd never takes flight, the 7th just too serious. It's not bad Mahler, it's just that there's so much more.

Gergiev: if you like loud, aggressive, go for the jugular Mahler you'll like it. So far I've sampled 2, 3, 6, & 7, and given the ecstatic reviews 8 is getting I'll probably get it too. Reminds me of Solti in a lot of ways: the small details are often overlooked for the bigger effect. SACD is just ok. Gergiev just can't seem to relax and let music be beautiful -- it's always so hard driven. His Scheherazade, Rite of Spring, Rachmaninoff 2nd, Boris Godunov are similarly treated.

There are some new 7ths worthy of attention. First came the Gerard Schwarz with Liverpool on Artek which I've enjoyed quite a bit. Well played, well conducted, well recorded, too bad it isn't SACD. Then from Exton there's a new one from Zdenek Macal and Czech Phil which could be the best recording ever made of the 7th. Too bad the performance is so low voltage. Dull, smoothed out -- kind of like the last Haitink. And the Solti is finally once again available this time on a single cd. It's really in your face, aggresive playing, but boy could the CSO play back in 1971! If you don't have the entire Solti set but only want the 7th, get it.

 

[scottder]

Since there hasnt been much movement Mahler-wise lately. I have come around to listening to the M4, one that I haven't given much thought or time to previously. I usually listen to the Sony Szell recording for this. I recently got the Fishcer recording as well because I had heard good things about it (both soundwise and performancewise as well). Any others I should give attention to?

Scott

 

[pbarach]

Quote:

Originally Posted by scottder /img/forum/go_quote.gif Since there hasnt been much movement Mahler-wise lately. I have come around to listening to the M4, one that I haven't given much thought or time to previously. I usually listen to the Sony Szell recording for this. I recently got the Fishcer recording as well because I had heard good things about it (both soundwise and performancewise as well). Any others I should give attention to?

If you haven't heard the ancient Mengelberg/Concertgebouw recording, I would urge you to listen to it (although the sound is poor). It's a priceless document of earlier Mahler performances, and the conductor was a friend of Mahler's. Some have compared Mengelberg to Horowitz, in that their interpretations are uniquely personalized.

 

[scottder]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pbarach /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you haven't heard the ancient Mengelberg/Concertgebouw recording, I would urge you to listen to it (although the sound is poor). It's a priceless document of earlier Mahler performances, and the conductor was a friend of Mahler's. Some have compared Mengelberg to Horowitz, in that their interpretations are uniquely personalized.

Will certainly seek this out then, sounds like he would have some interesting insights into the piece. Now to find a copy.

Scott

 

[mbhaub]

Yes, there hasn't been much activity here, and that's a shame. Anyway, there are a couple of other Mahler 4ths well worth getting.
1) Reiner/Chicago on RCA. This is still my favorite. The sacd sound is very good, and Reiner's understanding is profound.
2) Kletzki/EMI another top-notch version too often overlooked.
3) Levi/Atlanta on Telarc. Great sound, stunning playing, very fluent conducting. And you can get it really cheap. If this were the only M4 available, it would be fine. Really a very good version.