Gilbert Kaplan has died

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

Beautiful auto-pilot playing by the orchestra while ignoring the conductor. I listened for 10 minutes and threw it away. I didn't have the heart to give it to someone and ruin their taste.

But it is certainly lovely to know of his enthusiasm at least. Certainly one of the most enthusiastic fans at any rate.

[Monsieur Croche]

Last I heard, Richard Nanes was dead, also 

[kishnevi]

I'm of the opinion that if Kaplan's Mahler were heard blind, not knowing the conductor, it would get more respect around here. In any case, his Vienna recording is my desert island M2. My only complaint is the slightly underpowered Scherzo...but I can happily live with that.

Sarge

My desert island M2 is either Bernstein on DG or MTT/SFO or  Abbado/CSO or Chailly on DVD...depending on which toothbrush I used in the morning:   but Kaplan's Vienna recording is not far behind them, and his LSO recording is deep in the middle of the pack.

(Out of about 40 recordings of M2 on my shelves, there are only  two I actively dislike, and curiously they are Abbado's other two recordings.)

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

Last I heard, Richard Nanes was dead, also 

I wonder why I haven't seen any special edition reissues

[Monsieur Croche]

I wonder why I haven't seen any special edition reissues

zOMG, yes... I mean it is rather astonishing that the huge fan base for such especially exquisite beeyootifull piano pieces haven't made a huge collective noise demanding to have those recordings re-issued.

[springrite]

But it is certainly lovely to know of his enthusiasm at least. Certainly one of the most enthusiastic fans at any rate.

Absolutely!

[ComposerOfAvantGarde]

zOMG, yes... I mean it is rather astonishing that the huge fan base for such especially exquisite beeyootifull piano pieces haven't made a huge collective noise demanding to have those recordings re-issued.

[Sergeant Rock]

This discussion is interesting. Kaplan has never really been on my radar. The last I'd heard was quite some time ago now when the first couple of Mahler discs came out and were roundly dismissed as vanity projects by a dilettante. I'll try again with fresh ears.

In fact there was critical acclaim for his LSO recording when it came out (at the time I wouldn't have bought it without a nod from the British and American music rags). Less acclaim for his Vienna performance, most critics preferring the London, but still it received positive reviews too (see below). The negative criticism on display in this thread I can't understand. It's not the way I hear Kaplan's Mahler. His recordings of M2 move me (as a good Ressurection should) and the detail is extraordinary, obviously conducted by someone who knows the score well and can bring out those details (like the col legno episode before the climax of the development--a detail you usually can't hear in recordings by the "professionals").

A few comments found online (admittedly cherry picked to prove my point  ):

"If I say that Kaplan's Vienna recording of the Second is how I suspect the work would have sounded under Karajan you can draw what ever conclusions from that you want. But if you own this and no other version then you have a good advocate for a work which means everything to Gilbert Kaplan and I would certainly prefer him and his personal resources inside the Mahler tent than outside it." Tony Duggan, MusicWeb

"The pacing of the performance is perhaps its greatest strength. The tempi feel absolutely right, save perhaps for a broadening at the climax of the third movement scherzo, which seems mannered. There is sensitivity to detail but this does not compromise the visionary longer-term aspects of this huge score. With wider experience and confidence, Kaplan really does have important things to say when he conducts the music[...] All praise to Gilbert Kaplan for his boldness and for sharing his obsession with this great and visionary symphony." Terry Barfoot MusicWeb

"As to Kaplan's interpretation, it's mostly excellent. This first movement must be accounted one of the finest on disc–marvelously played by cellos and basses, the big moments pegged for all that they are worth, the second subject and quiet episodes gorgeously sustained and atmospheric[...]This is, then, a very fine (if a touch studied) Mahler Second, though not quite a first choice. Kaplan gets more authentic results from this recalcitrant orchestra than most other conductors[...]In the final analysis, Mahlerians will want to hear it for Kaplan's own thoroughly sympathetic and cogent view of the music, one that should put to rest once and for all any questions doubters may have about his credentials as a true Mahler conductor with something to say and the technical means to say it." Classics Today


Sarge

[Brahmsian]

In fact there was critical acclaim for his LSO recording when it came out (at the time I wouldn't have bought it without a nod from the British and American music rags). Less acclaim for his Vienna performance, most critics preferring the London, but still it received positive reviews too (see below). The negative criticism on display in this thread I can't understand. It's not the way I hear Kaplan's Mahler. His recordings of M2 move me (as a good Ressurection should) and the detail is extraordinary, obviously conducted by someone who knows the score well and can bring out those details (like the col legno episode before the climax of the development--a detail you usually can't hear in recordings by the "professionals").

A few comments found online (admittedly cherry picked to prove my point  ):

"If I say that Kaplan's Vienna recording of the Second is how I suspect the work would have sounded under Karajan you can draw what ever conclusions from that you want. But if you own this and no other version then you have a good advocate for a work which means everything to Gilbert Kaplan and I would certainly prefer him and his personal resources inside the Mahler tent than outside it." Tony Duggan, MusicWeb

"The pacing of the performance is perhaps its greatest strength. The tempi feel absolutely right, save perhaps for a broadening at the climax of the third movement scherzo, which seems mannered. There is sensitivity to detail but this does not compromise the visionary longer-term aspects of this huge score. With wider experience and confidence, Kaplan really does have important things to say when he conducts the music[...] All praise to Gilbert Kaplan for his boldness and for sharing his obsession with this great and visionary symphony." Terry Barfoot MusicWeb

"As to Kaplan's interpretation, it's mostly excellent. This first movement must be accounted one of the finest on disc–marvelously played by cellos and basses, the big moments pegged for all that they are worth, the second subject and quiet episodes gorgeously sustained and atmospheric[...]This is, then, a very fine (if a touch studied) Mahler Second, though not quite a first choice. Kaplan gets more authentic results from this recalcitrant orchestra than most other conductors[...]In the final analysis, Mahlerians will want to hear it for Kaplan's own thoroughly sympathetic and cogent view of the music, one that should put to rest once and for all any questions doubters may have about his credentials as a true Mahler conductor with something to say and the technical means to say it." Classics Today


Sarge

I will have to check it out, Sarge.  I am indeed curious. 

[(poco) Sforzando]

I will have to give the LSO version another whirl. As I said, my experience hearing him live was nothing to sneer at. If nothing else, the recording is worth keeping for the superb documentation - two booklets, one generally about the music and a second devoted to letters about the 2nd.

[relm1]

In fact there was critical acclaim for his LSO recording when it came out (at the time I wouldn't have bought it without a nod from the British and American music rags). Less acclaim for his Vienna performance, most critics preferring the London, but still it received positive reviews too (see below). The negative criticism on display in this thread I can't understand. It's not the way I hear Kaplan's Mahler. His recordings of M2 move me (as a good Ressurection should) and the detail is extraordinary, obviously conducted by someone who knows the score well and can bring out those details (like the col legno episode before the climax of the development--a detail you usually can't hear in recordings by the "professionals").

A few comments found online (admittedly cherry picked to prove my point  ):

"If I say that Kaplan's Vienna recording of the Second is how I suspect the work would have sounded under Karajan you can draw what ever conclusions from that you want. But if you own this and no other version then you have a good advocate for a work which means everything to Gilbert Kaplan and I would certainly prefer him and his personal resources inside the Mahler tent than outside it." Tony Duggan, MusicWeb

"The pacing of the performance is perhaps its greatest strength. The tempi feel absolutely right, save perhaps for a broadening at the climax of the third movement scherzo, which seems mannered. There is sensitivity to detail but this does not compromise the visionary longer-term aspects of this huge score. With wider experience and confidence, Kaplan really does have important things to say when he conducts the music[...] All praise to Gilbert Kaplan for his boldness and for sharing his obsession with this great and visionary symphony." Terry Barfoot MusicWeb

"As to Kaplan's interpretation, it's mostly excellent. This first movement must be accounted one of the finest on disc–marvelously played by cellos and basses, the big moments pegged for all that they are worth, the second subject and quiet episodes gorgeously sustained and atmospheric[...]This is, then, a very fine (if a touch studied) Mahler Second, though not quite a first choice. Kaplan gets more authentic results from this recalcitrant orchestra than most other conductors[...]In the final analysis, Mahlerians will want to hear it for Kaplan's own thoroughly sympathetic and cogent view of the music, one that should put to rest once and for all any questions doubters may have about his credentials as a true Mahler conductor with something to say and the technical means to say it." Classics Today

Sarge

But the point of my post was that the acclaim received is more a testament to the music and the performance skills of the orchestra and is in spite of the "ruderless" conductor.  "As a conductor, he can best be described as a very poor beater of time who far too often is unable to keep the ensemble together and allows most tempo transitions to fall where they may. His direction lacks few indications of dynamic control or balance and there is absolutely no attempt to give phrases any requisite shape.  In rehearsal, he admitted to our orchestra that he is not capable of keeping a steady tempo and that he would have to depend on us for any stability in that department. Considering his Everest-sized ego, this admission must have caused him great consternation upon reflection.  Some critics have written that he brings the finest details of the work to the surface. If his past performances were anything like ours, Mr. Kaplan excels in ignoring the blizzard of Mahler's performance direction."

Alot of musicians find what Kaplan symbolizes to be deeply offensive and I can understand that.

[Brian]

But the point of my post was that the acclaim received is more a testament to the music and the performance skills of the orchestra and is in spite of the "ruderless" conductor.

One of the reviews Sarge quotes (by David Hurwitz) anticipates that argument by pointing out that the Vienna Philharmonic, surprisingly, does not have an especially storied tradition as a great Mahler orchestra. (Contrast it with the major orchestras of New York [where Kaplan ran into such trouble], Amsterdam, etc.)

[Brahmsian]

I'm of the opinion that if Kaplan's Mahler were heard blind, not knowing the conductor, it would get more respect around here. In any case, his Vienna recording is my desert island M2. My only complaint is the slightly underpowered Scherzo...but I can happily live with that.

Sarge

I would love to hear this performance, without knowing beforehand it was Kaplan/Vienna.

[Brian]

A couple of things I just learned that should be pointed out.

1. Jansons/Concertgebouw uses the Kaplan edition of the M2 score.

2. Kaplan in fact has THREE recordings of the symphony, although one of them is his own arrangement for small orchestra.



The idea is not to "improve" on Mahler by any means. It's just to make the work more accessible to smaller local orchestras.

"With orchestra requirements about half of what Mahler indicated, K/M provides an opportunity for chamber orchestras, small community orchestras and regional opera orchestras to perform this work which normally requires more than 100 musicians. Although K/M calls for a smaller orchestra than Mahler intended, it is nonetheless a substantial orchestra about the same size as Beethoven's Fifth Symphony or Brahms's First Symphony."

[(poco) Sforzando]

A couple of things I just learned that should be pointed out.

1. Jansons/Concertgebouw uses the Kaplan edition of the M2 score.

2. Kaplan in fact has THREE recordings of the symphony, although one of them is his own arrangement for small orchestra.



The idea is not to "improve" on Mahler by any means. It's just to make the work more accessible to smaller local orchestras.

"With orchestra requirements about half of what Mahler indicated, K/M provides an opportunity for chamber orchestras, small community orchestras and regional opera orchestras to perform this work which normally requires more than 100 musicians. Although K/M calls for a smaller orchestra than Mahler intended, it is nonetheless a substantial orchestra about the same size as Beethoven's Fifth Symphony or Brahms's First Symphony."

Let us hope, however, that the violins are not in 1-1-2-2-1 proportion, as in certain HIP productions.

The idea of reduced orchestrations of works of this type is not as far-fetched as may seem. Schoenberg started a chamber orchestra version of Mahler's DLvdE, I have heard of a reduced-orchestra Tristan to 21 plays (was it by Rutland Boughton?), and I remember some years back the New Jersey Opera did a reduced-orchestra Wozzeck. In the works I heard, however, I was not convinced the smaller versions were improvements.

[jochanaan]

...In the works I heard, however, I was not convinced the smaller versions were improvements.

I doubt they were meant to be improvements; merely adjustments so more groups could actually play the music.

However, perhaps it is time to bring a stop to this rehashing of Mr. Kaplan's legacy.  The man just passed, after all.  I say again, Walk in beauty.