Recordings That You Are Considering

[Harry]

I bet Sarge and Harry will go along with you for this recommendation. For other reasons, of course. 

You know us well George.......

[George]

You know us well George.......

[Wanderer]

The first movement of the 3rd is rather longish but structurally is very clear. The death-march in the celli, basses, trombones, and timpani is pitted against the lively march in the woodwinds and violins. The deathmarch should be rough, wild, and played in a no-holds-bar kind of way. This should contrast with the rather delicate march in the woodwinds. Any successful performance will depend on this. The two marches alternate and each reappears 3-4 times. Each time they will come back with something not heard previously. A successful performance will also need to forshadow the reappearance of each march but not reveal too much to lose the tension.

I think Abbado got the "happy" march in the woodwinds right, beautifully played and shaped. But the deathmarch is a non-event. You can tell right away when the opening horn unison passage is played without the accent marks that something is going right. Of course everything SOUNDS very nice. But it is not suppose to sound nice. The general mood of this movement should be one of gloom with a hint of happiness. Joy and triumph only comes in the last movement with the blazing major chords that close the piece. In addition, there is very little sense in Abbado' s reading that everytime the two marches reappear they are revealing more. IT is almost as if they are just repeated on and on.

To me the ones who get it right are Chailly, Bernstein, and Bertini to name a few.

Thanks, PW. I wouldn't choose the term demonic to describe what you say, but I know what you mean.

Tasos, both SQ boxes from Dvorak are worth your money, and I would say, if the money is not a problem buy both, and don't forget to add the DGG box. 

That would save me the burden of choice, it would... 

[M forever]

Then I got this:

Which totally misses the demonic aspects of this work. The opening horn call is so bland you almost don't want to listen to the rest of the work. All in all a dreary reading.

Or maybe you are totally missing what this music is about and what stylistic world it comes from. Although it is an epic work both in terms of length and content and orchestral forces, it is developed from the background of Mahler's interest in, among other elements, the "Wunderhorn" folk poetry and its musical substance is mostly based on Mahler's own musical visions of this kind of naive fairy tale like form of poetry and the images it evokes for those who understand that background. Like Abbado obviously does. This recording is stylistically spot on and, besides Boulez' recording with the same orchestra, by far the best musical realization of this fairy tale world music. It has grace and elegance, style and color, but also a lot of power at the right moments (the horns in the "summer storm scene" for instance). Horns are particularly important in this work, and the instruments played by the Wiener Philharmoniker are exactly the kind of instruments Mahler heard when he composed the symphony. In other departments, their sonority also comes closest to what Mahler heard in his musical environment, and it is very obvious that no other orchestra can realize the very specific sonorities Mahler composed in this work quite as authentically as the Wiener Philharmoniker.

[Renfield]

Or maybe you are totally missing what this music is about and what stylistic world it comes from. Although it is an epic work both in terms of length and content and orchestral forces, it is developed from the background of Mahler's interest in, among other elements, the "Wunderhorn" folk poetry and its musical substance is mostly based on Mahler's own musical visions of this kind of naive fairy tale like form of poetry and the images it evokes for those who understand that background. Like Abbado obviously does. This recording is stylistically spot on and, besides Boulez' recording with the same orchestra, by far the best musical realization of this fairy tale world music. It has grace and elegance, style and color, but also a lot of power at the right moments (the horns in the "summer storm scene" for instance). Horns are particularly important in this work, and the instruments played by the Wiener Philharmoniker are exactly the kind of instruments Mahler heard when he composed the symphony. In other departments, their sonority also comes closest to what Mahler heard in his musical environment, and it is very obvious that no other orchestra can realize the very specific sonorities Mahler composed in this work quite as authentically as the Wiener Philharmoniker.

You know, I was reading PerfectWagnerite's post, and I thought: we need M forever for this. Deus ex machina!

Good to have you back.

[Greta]

Which totally misses the demonic aspects of this work. The opening horn call is so bland you almost don't want to listen to the rest of the work. All in all a dreary reading.

Man, this is one of my absolute favorite Mahler 3 recordings. The last movement is incredible, soaring and heartfelt. The first movement, the Wiener low brass could wake the dead. I mean it is fearsome. And Jessye Norman, superb.

The first movement of the 3rd is rather longish but structurally is very clear. The death-march in the celli, basses, trombones, and timpani is pitted against the lively march in the woodwinds and violins. The deathmarch should be rough, wild, and played in a no-holds-bar kind of way. This should contrast with the rather delicate march in the woodwinds. Any successful performance will depend on this.

No, no, the deathmarch really doesn't have to be that way. Maybe for you it does, and that's fine - everybody has their opinions of interpretation. But categorically, it doesn't have to be that wild, or rough even, to make it successful.

Two of my other fav 3rds are Boulez and Salonen, the deathmarch ("Winter") is focused, intense, controlled, which works really, really well. I like that to brood and ruminate. I mean, the devil doesn't have to march out with his pitchfork, he can stalk up out of the ground too...

I also think the woodwinds' "Spring" march isn't necessarily so happy either, not the first couple of times. But more sardonic. I want the "Spring" march to have that contrast between the graceful, classical style, and out-and-out bombasticness (where the raucous brass add in, and the woodwinds go to flourishes).

And when it gets rudely interrupted by "Winter" again, I want that to soar, and be anguished. About the only part I feel needs to be rather wild is the very last dash to the end, with the horn calls, I like that to be really out there.

But, all a matter of personal taste...to each his own.

(And BTW, thanks for giving me a good reason to revisit those three!)

I think Abbado got the "happy" march in the woodwinds right, beautifully played and shaped. But the deathmarch is a non-event. You can tell right away when the opening horn unison passage is played without the accent marks that something is going right. Of course everything SOUNDS very nice. But it is not suppose to sound nice. The general mood of this movement should be one of gloom with a hint of happiness. Joy and triumph only comes in the last movement with the blazing major chords that close the piece. In addition, there is very little sense in Abbado' s reading that everytime the two marches reappear they are revealing more. IT is almost as if they are just repeated on and on.

I think the whole thing is fairly blazing. I love how his marches are crisply played, very in-your-face brass, lot of attitude. Maybe revisit this one later - the whole point of collecting is to open yourself up to new interpretations, after all.

To me the ones who get it right are Chailly, Bernstein, and Bertini to name a few.

The Chailly is good. He'd make my top 5. Haven't heard Bertini. And which Bernstein?

[Papy Oli]

Thank you all for the comments on the abbado twofer, and the extension to his other mahler symphonies... mileages may vary indeed  So far i only have his Mahler 6th, which i quite enjoy, even though having often read it to be sidelined by many. Guess i'll get that twofer eventually 

[rubio]

How is this music (here performed by Svetlanov - very cheap on Regis)?

[Sean]

Then I got this:

Which totally misses the demonic aspects of this work. The opening horn call is so bland you almost don't want to listen to the rest of the work. All in all a dreary reading.

I got to know Mahler 3 from this. I always thought the opening theme one of the most obviously weakest and uninspiring he ever wrote and the whole symphony little more than a wayward series of quality musings after the heights of the Resurrection. Maybe there's something in Abbado's recording that has something to do with it but the adagio finale, nice idea, is obviously no match for that of the Ninth, or the First. Abbado is a subtle Mahlerian though- I also bought his fine Seventh, and there isn't much in M's review I'd disagree with. The piece and it's nature-syrup or whatever just doesn't grab me.

[Brian]

finale, nice idea, is obviously no match for that of the Ninth, or the First.

This might not be the proper thread for such discussions, but I'd like to hear more thoughts on the finale of the First. I heard it recently for the first time, thought that it went on forever, and didn't understand why exactly this was the case. Anyone care to share on this work?

[rubio]

Any gems in this set?

http://www.amazon.com/George-Szell-Philips-Recordings-1951-1969/dp/B0009A41XS/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1196675836&sr=1-2

[Renfield]

Any gems in this set?

http://www.amazon.com/George-Szell-Philips-Recordings-1951-1969/dp/B0009A41XS/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1196675836&sr=1-2

Oh yes! I haven't gotten around to properly sharing my impressions on my recent (rather expansive) shopping spree, but suffice to say that set is worth it for the Egmont alone!

(More detailed impressions when I'm at my other machine, so I can reference the track-list. The CDs themselves are not immediately accessible, at the moment. )

[Brian]

[Marcel]

Beethoven: Piano Concertos #1-5 by Melvyn Tan, Roger Norrington, London Classical Players BOX SET

What do you think about this set ? I want to buy it, but want to know any opinions...

[M forever]

I find Norrington's Beethoven contributions generally interesting, sometimes quirky and provocative, but usually stimulating, but these performances really aren't that interesting because Mr. Tan simply doesn't live up to the musical challenges of the solo parts. The overall impression is somebody banging around on a wimpy sounding fortepiano for a while. Kind of like the cliché a lot of people have of period performance. Here it is true. I don't even remember any specific musical details from these performances.

On the other hand, while I found Gardiner's readings of the symphonies streamlined and featureless, he has by far the better soloist in his recordings of the concertos in Robert Levin. Levin is a brilliant and stylistically very secure pianist who really understands the classical style.

So, if you want to hear these concertos on period instruments, you should definitely seek his recordings out.

[Marcel]

Thank you M for your recommendations.

[Drasko]

Not really considering, just waiting for release (January)

[sidoze]

His live account of nr 2, I think from the mid '90s, was one of my favourite performances.

[Drasko]

His live account of nr 2, I think from the mid '90s, was one of my favourite performances.

I think it could be very interesting recording. Berezovsky is playing those concertos in concerts for years now, and very often with that same orchestra and conductor (I've unfortunately missed them in 2nd concerto here in Belgrade few years ago). So at least it should be fully crystalized performance which is from the start more promissing than just lumping star soloist and conductor in studio together. We'll see.

[Marcel]

Not really considering, just waiting for release (January)

The cover looks like some pop technical issue...