Your Top 5 Mahler Movements - Poll!

[Mahlerian]

Surely at least the Purgatorio movement of 10 should have been included? Didn't Mahler pretty much finish that one?

Mahler finished the whole work in short score draft.  It's only the orchestration that remains for the most part.  There is a partial full score draft of the second movement (but missing a lot of musical details, so one needs to look to the short score) and of the third movement Purgatorio, but neither is as complete as the opening adagio.

Still, the Purgatorio movement doesn't make much sense outside of the context of the whole, as its function is to set up the changes in mood and material from the first part of the work to the second.

[Sergeant Rock]

Cheers, Rafael. That does look quite good. *adds to the ever so long list*
I was wondering about that. Some conductors have been known to record some of these works with several orchestras

I think the box set may be wrong. I have the original Levine Third and it is most definitely the Chicago Symphony and Chorus. The box lists the Chicago choir.

Sarge

[North Star]

I think the box set may be wrong. I have the original Levine Third and it is most definitely the Chicago Symphony and Chorus. The box lists the Chicago choir. I think they got the orchestra wrong.

Sarge

It does appear so; reviewers list CSO, as does Arkiv.

[San Antone]

I think the box set may be wrong. I have the original Levine Third and it is most definitely the Chicago Symphony and Chorus. The box lists the Chicago choir.

Sarge

It could be like the Bernstein CBS set where all but one symphony was with NYPO, the other ... was it Vienna?

[ritter]

It could be like the Bernstein CBS set where all but one symphony was with NYPO, the other ... was it Vienna?

Isn't it the Eighth with London?

[Sergeant Rock]

It could be like the Bernstein CBS set where all but one symphony was with NYPO, the other ... was it Vienna?

Levine's box includes performances from three orchestras (Chicago, LSO, Philly). They screwed up labeling the Chicago Third.

Sarge

[San Antone]

Isn't it the Eighth with London?

Yep - I wasn't sure.

Levine's box includes performances from three orchestras (Chicago, LSO, Philly). They screwed up labeling the Chicago Third.

Sarge

Thanks to our resident Mahlerian for straightening me out.

[Vaulted]

Oh, I do like Mahler, too.  0:)
I need a better recording of the 3rd, I think (I only have the Rattle), and I don't recall what I think of the 8th. Other than that, we're on good terms even if I don't visit Gustav too often.

Tennstedt (studio) was the convincer for me in the 3rd, really rhapsodic.
I only really rate Rattle in 10 and the Klangende Lied.

[Mirror Image]

My list may seem rather conventional to some other people's lists, but here goes nothing:

Symphony No. 5 in C-sharp minor - IV. Adagietto
Symphony No. 4 in G major - III. Ruhevoll, poco adagio
Symphony No. 6 in A minor - I. Allegro energico, ma non troppo. Heftig, aber markig
Symphony No. 7 in E minor - III. Scherzo
Symphony No. 9 - I. Andante comodo

I'm sure as time goes on and I become much more familiar with Mahler's symphonies, these will change, but this is just my current list.

[Jay F]

No. 7 - 2nd

That's one I regret not having room for. Mahler stepping into the future.

It was real surprise for me when I discovered who gave the second vote for it.

Why is that? Mine is the second vote. The 7th has always been one of my favorite Mahler symphonies, and the 2nd is my favorite movement. I also voted for No. 6 andante and m4; No. 2, m5; and No. 9, m1.

My votes in order, with favorite versions:
No. 6: andante. Bernstein CBS (The only version I ever want to hear. Especially in the first movement.)
No. 2: m5. I like every version I've ever heard. Both Bernstein NYPO recordings. Every Abbado version. Klemperer. Early Solti. I've never heard a version I dislike.
No. 7: m2. Bernstein CBS, DG. Tilson-Thomas. Abbado Chicago (this is the one that caught my attention early on).
No. 6: m4. Bernstein CBS (Super imprint: I never want to listen to any other version. I loved the way the original CD led into No. 8, even though the SQ was very rough.)
No. 9: m1. Bernstein CBS. (Another imprint version. No one else gets the first movement as right as Bernstein in his first recording.)

The one that just missed the top 5: No. 3: m1. Bernstein CBS. Abbado. Levine. Some days it does make my top 5, especially when I'm listening to it.

[aukhawk]

You can make that 3 votes for 7-2 now.

No surprise to see 9-1 romping away, and that goes first on my list too - although generally I prefer Mahler's lighter side (so far as he had one):
Symphony 9 - 1st movement  well, duh 
Symphony 7 - 2nd movement - trademark nature-boy Mahler, but deconstructed for us by the mature composer.  Special thanks to the shade of Klemperer for finishing the job!    (Other interpretations are available.)
Symphony 2 - 1st movement - I usually listen to this as a standalone piece with the wick turned up high - not really fond of the rest of this symphony. 
Symphony 7 - 3rd movement - right up there in the popular macabre tradition 
Symphony 3 - 3rd movement - the 3rd was my 'in' to Mahler, and this movement under Bernstein was just sweet 

I'm astonished to see 2 votes for 7-5  and equally surprised and saddened to see 0 for 3-6. 

[SharpEleventh]

Hmm this was actually pretty easy. First movements of 6th and 10th are my favorites and roughly equal, after that comes andante and finale from the 6th, roughly equal again. Then the first movement of the 9th.

I used to pretend to be quite a Mahler fan, but honestly other Mahler movements are rather meh to me and I probably could do without them.

[Mahlerian]

I can't vote.  Mahler didn't write in individual movements, and I don't think of them as separable from his symphonies as a whole.  Imagine trying to consider the scherzo of Beethoven's Fifth apart from the finale.  It doesn't make any sense.  They're too closely connected to remove from each other, and they depend too much on each other for their significance.

[Papy Oli]

4 out of 5 are still the same favourites as 5 years ago...

Mahler 1 - 4th mvt - my original gateway into Mahler
Mahler 2 - 1st mvt - my absolute addiction...the benchmark movement by which all cycles and versions are judged.
Mahler 3 - 4th mvt - O Meeeeensch...
Mahler 5 - 1st mvt - The trumpet...
mahler 6 - 1st mvt - backup addiction, just in case.

5th choice now would probably be the the M4's 4th mvt or the 7th's 3rd mvt or the 10th's Adagio in that order.

[Mirror Image]

I can't vote.  Mahler didn't write in individual movements, and I don't think of them as separable from his symphonies as a whole.  Imagine trying to consider the scherzo of Beethoven's Fifth apart from the finale.  It doesn't make any sense.  They're too closely connected to remove from each other, and they depend too much on each other for their significance.

You're such a party pooper!

[Jay F]

I can't vote.  Mahler didn't write in individual movements, and I don't think of them as separable from his symphonies as a whole.  Imagine trying to consider the scherzo of Beethoven's Fifth apart from the finale.  It doesn't make any sense.  They're too closely connected to remove from each other, and they depend too much on each other for their significance.

I like your thinking. Without breaking the symphonies up into movements, my five favorites are Nos. 6, 2, 7, 3, 8. This lets in Nos. 3 and 8, and excludes No. 9, as I really only like the first movement. I'd much rather listen to each of these in its entirety than consider individual movements.

[aukhawk]

I don't really get it.  IMHO, Mahler gives us several excellent examples of 'Symphony as collection of fairly unrelated pieces of music'.

Symphonies 2 & 4 both contain movements that Mahler originally wrote as part of some other project.  Symphonies 1 & 3 had movements removed altogether when Mahler had second thoughts.  In Symphony 6 the order of the middle movements is to this day 'conductors choice'.  The first movement of Symphony 2 was published and performed in public more than once, before Mahler even knew what he was going to write for the last movement.   Similarly the 2nd and 4th movements of Symphony 7 were written as part of the creative burst that became Symphony 6 (actually as a way of clearing writers block before penning the last movement of Symphony 6).  All this suggests to me that the structural imperative in these symphonies is not very great.

Clearly from a listener's point of view, any movement in a composite work - Symphony, Suite, whatever - has to work on its own terms without any reference to what comes later.  (A later movement may refer back to an earlier one in a satisfying way, but it doesn't really work the other way around.)  Because of this, most first movements (by any post-classical composer) can work as standalone pieces of music.  The first movement of Mahler 2 is the most obvious example, because the composer himself required a 5-minute pause to be inserted, at the end of that movement and before going on to the Andante.  Traditionally in the concert hall, the listener is a captive and must listen to the whole symphony, but when listening to recordings we don't have that limitation.

[Jo498]

I think aukhawk has a point. There are hardly any Mahler movements as tightly connected as the last two in Beethoven's 5th and several were composed as separate works so this is a disingenious comparison.

[Mahlerian]

I don't really get it.  IMHO, Mahler gives us several excellent examples of 'Symphony as collection of fairly unrelated pieces of music'.

Symphonies 2 & 4 both contain movements that Mahler originally wrote as part of some other project.  Symphonies 1 & 3 had movements removed altogether when Mahler had second thoughts.  In Symphony 6 the order of the middle movements is to this day 'conductors choice'.  The first movement of Symphony 2 was published and performed in public more than once, before Mahler even knew what he was going to write for the last movement.   Similarly the 2nd and 4th movements of Symphony 7 were written as part of the creative burst that became Symphony 6 (actually as a way of clearing writers block before penning the last movement of Symphony 6).  All this suggests to me that the structural imperative in these symphonies is not very great.

Clearly from a listener's point of view, any movement in a composite work - Symphony, Suite, whatever - has to work on its own terms without any reference to what comes later.  (A later movement may refer back to an earlier one in a satisfying way, but it doesn't really work the other way around.)  Because of this, most first movements (by any post-classical composer) can work as standalone pieces of music.  The first movement of Mahler 2 is the most obvious example, because the composer himself required a 5-minute pause to be inserted, at the end of that movement and before going on to the Andante.  Traditionally in the concert hall, the listener is a captive and must listen to the whole symphony, but when listening to recordings we don't have that limitation.

None of these examples show that Mahler's music is structurally disconnected.  I'll grant you the example of the First, but Mahler definitely improved the structure of the work by excising the original second movement, in my opinion.

Certainly, it is true that the first movement of the Second was initially played separately from the rest, but it was with the intention of being the first movement of a symphony, and after the symphony was written he never played any portion of the work by itself.

With the Third, the movement was not removed after the symphony was written, but in the course of the process of writing it.  To say that this indicates that the movements are unconnected would be to say that any book that has undergone editing before being sent to the publisher's lacks a plot.  Like with the Second, some of the middle movements of the Third were played alone before the work was finished, but this does not at all undermine the very close connections between the movements in this work.

As for writing two movements of the Seventh before finishing the Sixth, this is part of the normal working process of many (perhaps the vast majority of) composers, and implies nothing about a lack of structural integrity.  In fact, the Sixth, along with the Fifth and Eighth, is one of the most highly integrated symphonic structures by Mahler, and far more highly integrated than the majority of symphonies of his or any other time.

At any rate, it is not true that an individual movement must be able to stand on its own terms, nor are Mahler's first movements usually intended to.  They routinely set up musical problems that are not solved until the finales.

[Pat B]

I was wondering about that. Some conductors have been known to record some of these works with several orchestras

There is a really nice Mahler discography: http://gustavmahler.net.free.fr/index.html.