Mahler before 1970: Your Preferences

[DavidW]

Many hundreds!?  I don't think so.  A few dozen yeah, but many hundreds would characterize all Mahler recordings period.

Thanks for the clarification on the hi-fi thing.

[Renfield]

Many hundreds!?  I don't think so.  A few dozen yeah, but many hundreds would characterize all Mahler recordings period.

I think this really isn't your day for reading comprehension, David.

Read again. I said historical choices in Mahler are only few if your definition of 'many' is 'many hundreds', which of course there simply weren't back then. But there were still many choices, if you're willing to consider a good few dozen 'many'.

So: you think there weren't many Mahler recordings to choose from, pre-1970. I think there definitely were.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

Now, I'd like to broaden the question a bit.

I think we've established that there are lots of good and great Mahler recordings from before the 1970 cutoff. In view of this, do you believe that the earlier Mahler is superior to the later Mahler?

I can't give a straight yes/no answer to this. But I do think there is more "pioneering spirit" in those earlier recordings, and this makes them particularly attractive. It's not something that's easy to define; but it feels like it's there.

[Renfield]

I can't give a straight yes/no answer to this. But I do think there is more "pioneering spirit" in those earlier recordings, and this makes them particularly attractive. It's not something that's easy to define; but it feels like it's there.

I think you hit the nail in the head as to what makes earlier Mahler special.

Does it also make it somehow superior? Not on account of its being earlier. But maybe on account of particular exponents of the early period, on an individual basis. Klemperer's Mahler is superior to Chailly's, but not (IMO) because it's 'old school'.

[DavidW]

I think this really isn't your day for reading comprehension, David.

You mistakenly used an adjective as a noun (hi-fi), where the noun is accepted use and the adjective is not, and now you mock me for misunderstanding your mangling of the English language? 

How many recordings can you list for Mahler's 8th symphony recorded before 1970?  Are you going to list a dozen or less and say that's technically many in comparison to Zemlinsky?  Is that your point?  Because that's pretty weak.

[DavidW]

I think we've established that there are lots of good and great Mahler recordings from before the 1970 cutoff. In view of this, do you believe that the earlier Mahler is superior to the later Mahler?

I can't give a straight yes/no answer to this. But I do think there is more "pioneering spirit" in those earlier recordings, and this makes them particularly attractive. It's not something that's easy to define; but it feels like it's there.

I believe that later Mahler recordings are clearly superior to early Mahler recordings.  I do not think that there is a pioneering spirit, if anything I think the opposite.  Most of the recordings listed are not special, many of them are just run throughs to get them on record made by conductors and orchestras that were busy trying to commit every conceivable masterpiece to lp or radio broadcast.  Newer recordings show conductors that took considerable time deciding on their interpretation for a specific Mahler symphony.  As a result there is much more variety in performance and more of a sense of a personal statement in modern Mahler recordings.

[Renfield]

You mistakenly used an adjective as a noun (hi-fi), where the noun is accepted use and the adjective is not, and now you mock me for misunderstanding your mangling of the English language? 

How many recordings can you list for Mahler's 8th symphony recorded before 1970?  Are you going to list a dozen or less and say that's technically many in comparison to Zemlinsky?  Is that your point?  Because that's pretty weak.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_fidelity

"High fidelity—or hi-fi—reproduction is a term used by home stereo listeners and home audio enthusiasts (audiophiles) to refer to high-quality reproduction of sound [1] or images, to distinguish it from the poorer quality sound produced by inexpensive audio equipment."

I am happy to not need to offend people for momentary misapprehension of a term's conventional scope, or an apparent difficulty with pragmatics on their behalf, and will expand my previous statement to 'this is probably not your day', period.

Least of all for making a claim that ranges over 'historical Mahler recordings', then arbitrarily limiting it to 'historical Mahler recordings of the 8th symphony' when I try to explain to you that your (original) claim is either badly phrased, or inaccurate.

1: There were numerous Mahler to choose from before 1970.

2: There were not numerous Mahler 8ths, or for that matter 7ths, to choose from before 1970.

1 and 2 are not mutually exclusive. My point still stands, however offensive it may be to you.

[Renfield]

I've read less than flattering things about the Kempe - but Boult's should be an interesting recording.

Anyone acquainted with it?

[Daverz]

Note how I didn't say 'work in the hi fi'; I meant 'work in high fidelity audio'.

Oh, jeez, I know exactly what you meant; Maybe DW is having a bad day.

Now as for whether recordings from the CD Mahler boom are better, I do think some older recordings are riding on the reputation they got because there was less competition at the time.  I think Bernstein's first cycle and several of Klemperer's recordings still hold up, though.

[Renfield]

Maybe DW is having a bad day.

That's what I tried to suggest, after I 'mangled' the English language by using 'hi fi' as per its primary definition as a noun.

Must be a hell of a bad day.


Edit: And I'm inclined to echo your sentiment over older recordings sometimes riding on reputation, though I can't at the moment think of a historical Mahler recording, specifically, that was lauded in its era, and is actually not all that good.

There's an interesting exercise: overrated historical Mahler, anyone?

[eyeresist]

Oh, jeez, I know exactly what you meant; Maybe DW is having a bad day.

I think maybe the thread is having a bad day 

Now as for whether recordings from the CD Mahler boom are better, I do think some older recordings are riding on the reputation they got because there was less competition at the time.  I think Bernstein's first cycle and several of Klemperer's recordings still hold up, though.

I think Walter's 1938 9th is still the one to beat.

[jlaurson]

For me, that's because its existence had completely eluded me until now. Duly noted!

Tsk.tsk.

http://www.weta.org/oldfmblog/?p=1192

[Renfield]

Tsk.tsk.

http://www.weta.org/oldfmblog/?p=1192

I shall repent for my sin in due time, by means of monetary donation to Amazon, and reception of the Inspired Kletzki 4th. 0:)

The Neumann 7th also looks like a very intriguing proposition - especially given the relative dearth of early 7ths.

(You've a typo in the Mahler 8th, BTW.)



And, pace eyeresist, I don't think the thread is having a bad day at all: just fairly divergent views on early Mahler!

Surely that's the point?

[not edward]

No. 7

Vaclav Neumann, Gewandhaus Orchester Leipzig
This is a very recent discovery for me... while in Leipzig for the Mahler-Fest (where the 7th was the best performance) I found this on the Naxos Music Library. What an absolutely terrific, awesome performance!

To call this tempting would be the understatement of the decade. To the wishlist it goes!

[DavidW]

Renfield you're right I was having a bad day.  I had a heachache, was irritable and overly sensitive.  I understand what you mean now.

[Renfield]

Renfield you're right I was having a bad day.  I had a heachache, was irritable and overly sensitive.  I understand what you mean now.

No worries.

[Sergeant Rock]

No. 5

Vaclav Neumann, Gewandhaus Orchester Leipzig
JUST edging out the DG Kubelik, which is also one of my favorites. (Much better than the slower Audite recording from the 80s.)

I didn't forget about that...I just assumed it was a 70s recording. Time to change my list.

Sarge

[jlaurson]

1967 was a very good year...

No. 1

1962
Otmar Suitner, Staatskapelle Dresden
(Kubelik is another strong contender, of course, but my preferred Kubelik (live, BRSO, audite) isn't before 1970s.)

No. 2

1975
Zubin Mehta, WPh
(Cheating: 1975 recording. Maybe I can think of one for the required time period that's really stunning.)

No. 3

1967
RafaelKubelik, BRSO
This is, I suppose, where Horenstein ought to be. But while I appreciate that Third, I simply haven't quite come
around to thinking it's truly the bee's knees.

No. 4

1957
Paul Kletzki, Philharmonia
That was easy; it's in my top-3, even without statute of limitations applied.

No. 5

1967
Vaclav Neumann, Gewandhaus Orchester Leipzig
JUST edging out the DG Kubelik, which is also one of my favorites. (Much better than the slower Audite recording from the 80s.)

No. 6

1967
Sir John Barbirolli, Philharmonia
Looove it! British Bulldog drags Mahler through the Alps.

No. 7

1969?
Vaclav Neumann, Gewandhaus Orchester Leipzig

This is a very recent discovery for me... while in Leipzig for the Mahler-Fest (where the 7th was the best performance) I found this on the Naxos Music Library. What an absolutely terrific, awesome performance!

Not out on CD, but extant on LP, is a Leizpig Neumann Mahler 6th (!!)
Would be the same that was--along with the 5th--published by Philips, back in the days? (The 5th made it onto an early CD as well.)

No. 8

1960
Dimitri Mitropoulos , WPh
Fairly easy choice, too...
By the way: The Mitropoulos Mahler Box with 1,3,5,6,8,9 + Adagio is available again. In the US, UK, and Germany.

DLvdE

1966
Leonard Bernstein, WPh
One of the best Lied recordings, to this day.

No. 9

1966
Karel Ancerl, Czech PO
I've long promoted this 9th, I won't disown it now. Wonderful recording.

No.10

1965
Eugene Ormandy, Philadelphia Orchestra
I reckon that's the only choice that qualified, huh?

[kishnevi]

DLvdE

1966
Leonard Bernstein, WPh
One of the best Lied recordings, to this day.

Jens, have you had a chance to listen to the Wunderlich/Fischer-Dieskau/Krips performance from 1964 DG released earlier this year? 

[jlaurson]

Jens, have you had a chance to listen to the Wunderlich/Fischer-Dieskau/Krips performance from 1964 DG released earlier this year?

Nope, not the new version yet. An old unacceptable (sound-quality-wise) pirate copy once (and not even all the way through)... but then it didn't feel like there was even merit in trying to hear if there was something in it. That issue has been taken care of, I understand, so I am obviously looking forward to hearing it... although I'd still rather imagine a Windgassen-Fischer-Dieskau version to float around somewhere... he's the tenor for DLvdE that I imagine might have been perfect. Alternatively, in my hypothetical alternate reality, I'd like for Mahler to have gotten to properly re-orchestrate the piece which, if he had ever heard it, he'd undoubtedly have done.