Blind comparison : Mahler 2nd symphony [2nd round until March 16]

[Madiel]

Hi

I don't know pratices of this forum. On the french one, you have to hide the results of the comparaison. That's why I will use a white font.
Please, can you help and tell me what is the right method ?

We are doing the same thing here. So you are right.

[Cosi bel do]

Hi

I don't know pratices of this forum. On the french one, you have to hide the results of the comparaison. That's why I will use a white font.
Please, can you help and tell me what is the right method ?

The classement is :
Kind regards
Elanore-clo

Exactly, white font is the right method

Thanks for your vote.

The Beethoven comparison for N2 is interesting, as is the lack of spontaneity by comparison with N1. Comparing these 2 versions specifically is interesting, actually, I think there are quite many common elements between the two, differences are easier to point out as a consequence.

Would you like another group ?

[Pat B]

I don't speak english very well. SO I want to apologize for possible mistakes.

No need for apology. Your English is fine -- certainly much better than my French!

Anyway, welcome to gmg.

[eleanore-clo]

Hi Cosi
Thank you for your kind offer of testing a new group. Unfortunately I am quite busy this week. If an opportunity presents itself before 16th March, I'll post.
Kind regards
Eleanore-clo

[aukhawk]

In my group, it was easy to pick the outstanding one.  However in some ways picking the 3rd of 3 is more significant, as only one is to be eliminated.  So I have to spend a bit more time listening to the two recordings I really don't like very much     
The reviewers' dilemna, I suppose.  I'll be done within the next 24h, Cosi.

[Cosi bel do]

OK... But maybe we could already know which is your favourite ? Just to fuel the discussion a little, and coz I'm really curious 

[aukhawk]

Vote for Group O

My plan was to listen to the opening section (5 minutes or so, up to where the harp walks up the scale) from each of these, and also from each of the 3 versions I have - and then go back and listen to the entire thing for each group member.  However ...

     O1 > > > O2 >= O3

O1 - ... However O1 grabbed me straight away, and I couldn't stop at 5 mins, it had my attention from start to end.  I like this better than any of the 3 versions I have. 
Although the orchestral playing has impressive precision and attack in the opening, at other times it is affettuoso but not too much so, this to my ears is a very authentic echt Mahler sound.  (But I'm no expert!)  Then the dramatic staccato section (around 13-14 minutes) is sharp as a knife. 
The recording is full of close detail, good if not quite demo-class.  I shall have to know who this is, and I do hope they've recorded the 7th!

O2 - I ended up listening to O2 and O3 twice, to separate them for 2nd/3rd place.  It didn't help ...
O2 starts fast, not really what I would call a funeral pace. Later, and especially in the second half of the movement, huge liberties are taken with the tempo.  This turns out to be a very interventionist conductor - not really my taste, but the results are persuasive.  What is lost though, is that implacable march-like tread that should carry you through the music, from start to end.
The recording is dry and with a wiry strings quality.  All things considered, I could hazard a guess at ...

03  Slow start (it does speed up later), and ragged ensemble among the basses.  It's catching - later the brass fluff their lines - if I were unkind I'd suggest maybe this orchestra would have got on better without a conductor.  Other than that it's a fairly straight-ahead interpretation, with many similarities to a version that I have which is often cited as a prime recommendation. 
Live I think, and in a big acoustic - I wouldn't be surprised if this were a recording in the BBC Legend series or similar.  Nicer, fuller sound than O2, though lacking in close detail - again very reminiscent of '70s BBC broadcasts.

All very interesting - much better than I expected because this isn't really among my favourite Mahler symphonies.
I'll have time to do another group if you want to send me one, ta.

[Cosi bel do]

Please, as long as they're whited out, don't hesitate to share your guesses or the similarities you think about

I'll send you group P then !

[aukhawk]

1.  Well, I wouldn't want to look a complete idiot! 
O1, someone like Gielen maybe?  O2, possibly Bernstein/NYPO/60s.  O3 has similarities to my Klemperer/Philh.
2.  Got them, thanks.

[Cosi bel do]

1.  Well, I wouldn't want to look a complete idiot! 

You would certainly not, as recognizing conductors is a very difficult game. Your guesses or comparisons are indeed, at least, very interesting. I can't say more for the moment but I'll certainly remind these references when announcing results for these 3 version.

[aukhawk]

Onimous  Oh No!    damn! 

[kishnevi]

My decision on Group M.  Very clear loser here.

Preference M3 over M2 over M1

Reasons:

M1--flaccid and lack of tension for most of the movement;  the conductor seemed to have gotten confused and thought he was performing the second movement.  This recording proves that not all live performances are more intense than studio recordings.   There was some sublimity,  but the sort of c. 1800 sublimity of tourists experiencing the Alps on the horizon.

M2 and M3 much better paced, with tension and appropriate darkness.   M2 was marginally better in pacing,  but the difference between old recordings and modern ones did have an impact, and made M3 have a better impact on me.  I definitely want to know what performances they are, because if I don't have them (a very likely possibility with M2, since I have almost no "historical" recordings of Mahler beyond Walter's 1938 and a Mitropolous set) I will want to get them.

[Cosi bel do]

Thanks Jeffrey.

About group M :
I think this is how I would have ranked these versions too. Of course I don't know how I would have reacted without knowing who is behind each, but this is kind of what I think of these. Not at all what I really expected in the votes, though, because of the sound quality, but M2 is doing far better than I thought, in the first votes.

Do I send you another group ?

[mc ukrneal]

Here are my comments for Group M:

M1 –   A lot of intensity, with perhaps a bit too much staccato in the early stages. But they mean business. Yet somehow I am not at all satisfied. I think they lack forward propulsion in quite a bit of it, particularly early. It's a shame, because they do have a beautiful sound. I think they lack the overarching lines and connections.  Ranking: 3

M2 –  Older sound. Here we have a much tighter pacing and it makes a difference. But really, I am not in love with this one either. Playing is a bit ragged at moments and this really takes away from it at times (and strangely it is not in the places you might expect it to be).But at least I can hear them getting some of it right. Ranking: 1

M3 – Oi. I was really hoping for a quite nice one. This one isn't it either.  This one makes some really impressive use of sound. But there is not enough nuance. For example, at the start, you have the upper strings creating this lovely tension, while the lower strings play a melody over it. Here, the strings don't have any nuance – they play soft and then loud and then back. There is no build up or a feeling that they are breathing. The shifts are just too abrupt and harsh. This is just one example, but is the problem I have throughout.   Ranking: 2

To be honest, none of them should go through in my opinion. The first lacked propulsion and was a bit like a lump of lead (even though timing was not the slowest of the three). The second had technical issues, something that usually buries a performance for me, but I can hear them trying to get the piece across (and in some places succeeding). The third lacks nuance and detail. I hope these aren't one of the three I own (though two have already been kicked out!).

So, with great reluctance, I have my order: M2, M3, M1.

[eleanore-clo]

Hi Cosi

It's OK for a new group.

Kind regards
Eleanore-clo

[Cosi bel do]

Here are my comments for Group M:

...

About group M
3 voters and 3 different rankings, but there is one characteristic, which is that the three of you are not at all voting against M2 as I feared. And it is interesting to see it ranked 1st by 2 voters (Asinius Pollion and you) and second by Jeffrey. A couple more votes, and the identity of the eliminated version could also become quite clear...

[Cosi bel do]

Hi Cosi

It's OK for a new group.

Kind regards
Eleanore-clo

Group L for eleanore
+ group O for mc ukrneal

[kishnevi]

About Group M.
M2 is musically strong enough to get past the bad sonics.  Plus I've heard a lot of recordings that sound far more "historic" than M2.  It's also true that computer speakers may minimize differences in sonics that might be far more apparent on a true sound system.

[aukhawk]

Results for Group P - and comments now added below.

I quite like all these, but  [edit - NB changed my vote]   P3 > P1 > P2

P1 - played very straight - the music is dramatic enough and this conductor sees no need to over-egg it.  It's an approach that I approve of in principle, however having heard some other versions that do lay on the extra drama, I must say some of them are very persuasive.
The recording is good, though I'm guessing not very modern, in an acoustic so big there's a bit of slap-echo.

P2 - highly articulated, very pointy in the dotted rhythms.  The lyrical sections are languid, the staccato section very dramatic.  Feels slightly lightweight in comparison with many others, but this may partly be the recording which is good and close, more orchestra, less hall.

P3 - everything about this is big and weighty - the interpretation, the orchestra (basses digging away remorselessly), the rich and reverbrant recording, an overall impression of immense gravity.  Taken very slow, any heroic brass sections are skimped over quickly, and then it's back to those doom-laden grave-digging basses.  The final section is very much in the same world as Rachmaninov's (much later) Isle of the Dead.  Possibly not what Mahler had in mind.
I could easily enjoy this version (if enjoy is the right word) as a standalone tone poem.

End.  Phew, exhausting.

[eleanore-clo]

Hi

L1: violins give dark, tragic and a wonderful color, they spendidly drive the movement, powerful brasses .
L2: quite artificial, sometimes it's difficult to feel the links, a succession of effects. Doesn't it lack of soul ?
L1> L2

Kind regards

Eleanore-clo