The Great Mahler Debate

[71 dB]

Sound system is not a problem. I am an acoustics engineer. My system is relatively cheap but of very high quality. Anyway, I have listened Mahler with Sennheiser HD-580.

I haven't listened #5 # 6 yet. I look forward to hear all the counterpoint you are talking about.

[greg]

I haven't listened #5 # 6 yet. I look forward to hear all the counterpoint you are talking about.

there you go, that oughta change your mind about the counterpoint, at least 

[PerfectWagnerite]

Sound system is not a problem. I am an acoustics engineer. My system is relatively cheap but of very high quality. Anyway, I have listened Mahler with Sennheiser HD-580.

I haven't listened #5 # 6 yet. I look forward to hear all the counterpoint you are talking about.

But you have heard the 9th. The first movement is counterpoint personified.  Like O Mensch said, Mahler's MASTERY of his art is such that even though there is a lot going on it never sounds BUSY.

And what kind of sound quality is from the Naxos streaming anyway? You may have good headphones but if the source sucks it doesn't do you any good.

[71 dB]

But you have heard the 9th. The first movement is counterpoint personified.  Like O Mensch said, Mahler's MASTERY of his art is such that even though there is a lot going on it never sounds BUSY.

Yeah, it seems to be like that.

And what kind of sound quality is from the Naxos streaming anyway? You may have good headphones but if the source sucks it doesn't do you any good.

128 kbps. Not High-End but good enough to explore Mahler's art

[PerfectWagnerite]

Yeah, it seems to be like that.

Also, even though the orchestra employed by Mahler is huge, his scoring is very light. You may notice that there is very little doubling of different voices. So when Mahler is loud, it is not because everyone is playing the same thing but rather each instrumental group is playing different material, but the tone color is different enough so all voices are heard. This is quite different from composers like Elgar and Brahms and Schumann where they LOVE to double the voices to achieve a richer, more blended sort of sound. You just have to get used to it.

[DavidW]

Yes. The tempo of Mahler's slow movememts aren't that slow and he doesn't seem to have really fast movements.

I've noticed alot of variability in tempo from conductor to conductor.  I wonder if Mahler was general and vague on the matter of tempo.  Maybe what you want are some recordings that really contrast the fast and slow movements well!   Alright Mahlerites, what recordings do you think fit that bill?

I have been streaming from Naxos server thanks to the links I got from MT. The 2nd symphony is conducted by Mariss Jansons.

Well that's neat.  If I have time I'll wander through Naxos' site later today to hear some Buxtehude.

[greg]

I've noticed alot of variability in tempo from conductor to conductor.  I wonder if Mahler was general and vague on the matter of tempo.  Maybe what you want are some recordings that really contrast the fast and slow movements well!   Alright Mahlerites, what recordings do you think fit that bill?

i'm not very familiar with multiple recordings much at all, but I can say, at least for the 6th, it'd be better to go with Karajan than Boulez- although I do like how Boulez takes the opening movement slower.

Also, even though the orchestra employed by Mahler is huge, his scoring is very light. You may notice that there is very little doubling of different voices. So when Mahler is loud, it is not because everyone is playing the same thing but rather each instrumental group is playing different material, but the tone color is different enough so all voices are heard. This is quite different from composers like Elgar and Brahms and Schumann where they LOVE to double the voices to achieve a richer, more blended sort of sound. You just have to get used to it.

Yeah, and also, there's less doubling at the octave when lots of instruments are playing, which makes the whole sound less muddy. So those two things combined help a lot, and you can usually hear every instrument playing, although in tutti ff passages, the harp and celesta can still be totally lost, but it seems lots of other composers make the same mistake.

[knight66]

Yeah, and also, there's less doubling at the octave when lots of instruments are playing, which makes the whole sound less muddy. So those two things combined help a lot, and you can usually hear every instrument playing, although in tutti ff passages, the harp and celesta can still be totally lost, but it seems lots of other composers make the same mistake.

Or perhaps the instruments have not been placed to allow the sound to come through, or perhaps the conductors have not worked with the orchestra to ensure the full scoring can be heard, or the microphones were not placed correctly in the studio....just a thought.

Mike

[71 dB]

I've noticed alot of variability in tempo from conductor to conductor.  I wonder if Mahler was general and vague on the matter of tempo.  Maybe what you want are some recordings that really contrast the fast and slow movements well!   Alright Mahlerites, what recordings do you think fit that bill?

Mahler's own musical format does not allow much variation to anything. That's one reason he is a second rate composer to me. Elgar developed an extremely flexible yet personal style allowing him to do almost anything. That's a sign of a genius.

After hearing half of Mahler's symphonies I think I have decoded his musical "building blocks". I feel like I could start composing new Mahler symphonies if I wanted. I am not a Sibelius fan but I have to say Mahler makes Sibelius sound good in comparison.

Well that's neat.  If I have time I'll wander through Naxos' site later today to hear some Buxtehude.

I hope you like what you hear.

[PerfectWagnerite]

Or perhaps the instruments have not been placed to allow the sound to come through, or perhaps the conductors have not worked with the orchestra to ensure the full scoring can be heard, or the microphones were not placed correctly in the studio....just a thought.

Mike

It helps also to have a MAHLER orchestra. I really like the Concertgebouw and the NYPO, the biting woodwinds and brazen brass can cut through the thickest textures. The VPO, while a great orchestra is not ideal for Mahler, the sound is just too refined.

[greg]

Or perhaps the instruments have not been placed to allow the sound to come through, or perhaps the conductors have not worked with the orchestra to ensure the full scoring can be heard, or the microphones were not placed correctly in the studio....just a thought.

Mike

lol, yeah, all of that's possible

[MishaK]

But you have heard the 9th. The first movement is counterpoint personified.  Like O Mensch said, Mahler's MASTERY of his art is such that even though there is a lot going on it never sounds BUSY.

For the record, it's Sarge who said that.

Mahler's own musical format does not allow much variation to anything. That's one reason he is a second rate composer to me.

You came to this erudite conclusion through intensive study of Mahler's scores, no doubt?

After hearing half of Mahler's symphonies I think I have decoded his musical "building blocks". I feel like I could start composing new Mahler symphonies if I wanted.

The world is eagerly awaiting your completion of the 10th.

[greg]

nah, let's let him compose a new one, titled "Mahler's 11th". No one would know, it'd be so obvious it was an undiscovered work written by Mahler , the whole world would be thrilled.

[71 dB]

You came to this erudite conclusion through intensive study of Mahler's scores, no doubt?

Everybody here says Mahler's music is very transparent. Doesn't that mean what you hear is what's in the score? What is there in the score that can't be heard and why is it there if it can't be heard? I don't get this obsession of studying scores. Do you evaluate movies watching them or reading the sripts?

The world is eagerly awaiting your completion of the 10th.

Sure, but I don't limit my musical ambitious to Mahler. Tinkering with Payne's elaboration of Elgar's 3rd would be much more interesting. The study of how classical music and new electronic music could be combined is near my heart. I dream about "breakbeat baroque cantatas".

[greg]

Everybody here says Mahler's music is very transparent. Doesn't that mean what you hear is what's in the score? What is there in the score that can't be heard and why is it there if it can't be heard? I don't get this obsession of studying scores. Do you evaluate movies watching them or reading the sripts?

wow...... this coming from someone who's, what was it, an engineer of some kind?
seriously, pick up a score and study it for once- no one could learn how to compose just by listening to music

[71 dB]

wow...... this coming from someone who's, what was it, an engineer of some kind?
seriously, pick up a score and study it for once- no one could learn how to compose just by listening to music

Acoustics engineer.

Why? I think I have learned a lot just listening. Andy claims to enjoy my 2nd symphony (is he just being polite?). How is that possible since I have only the basic knowledge of music theory and I don't study much scores (Some fragments of Elgar's scores I have whenever they are printed on CD).

[MishaK]

Everybody here says Mahler's music is very transparent. Doesn't that mean what you hear is what's in the score? What is there in the score that can't be heard and why is it there if it can't be heard? I don't get this obsession of studying scores. Do you evaluate movies watching them or reading the sripts?

In order to make sure that you are actually hearing and processing everything. Are you telling me you have instant aural memory and could reproduce an entire Mahler symphony from first hearing? If not, you may want to look at a score for deeper understanding.

[mahlertitan]

In order to make sure that you are actually hearing and processing everything. Are you telling me you have instant aural memory and could reproduce an entire Mahler symphony from first hearing? If not, you may want to look at a score for deeper understanding.

he claims that he does.

[zamyrabyrd]

Indeed, the opening 10 minutes of the 9th is like being punched in the stomach.
Mike

Oh boy, from the time I bought Barbirolli's cassette of the 9th more than 20 years ago, I must have listened to the first movement approaching if not exceeding a hundred times. The tape eventually wore out and I got the CD of the same performance. Still if I hear it again, I expect to hear different facets of the diamond as well as in the last movement. Those two together are hard to beat as the ne plus ultra of music. But incidentally...as befits a Mahler thread...

In his book of Norton lectures "The Unanswered Question"  Bernstein explains some of the structural ambiguity in the opening of the Adagietto of the 5th Symphony. I'll type this out:

"Then what is the magic secret? Ambiguity, as if you didn't know--and more than just dualistic ambiguity. You see all that vamping on the harp is syntactically vague; we have no idea what beat we're on or what meter we're in*. What's more the harp is setting up the key of the piece, F major by setting up the key  of the piece by suggesting its tonic triad, but only suggesting itbecause the root of the triad itself, F is missing. Only two-thirds of the triad is given us, the A and the C, reduplicated in several octaves, but still only two different notes. So we're not sure that our key is going to be F major...

As the three upbeats begin we would almost vote for A minor because there's that A in the cello part that seems to predominate: but no, it sneakily descends to F**--Oh it feels so good. We're home, in F Major but there's still that unresolved tug-at-the-heart in that appoggiatura up there in the melody, and when it
resolves we just melt away with the pleasure of fulfillment."  p.199

*Harp goes from binary eighth notes to triplets, but omitting the main beats.
** Contrabass pizzicato

This is only a miniscule peek into the complex structures inherent in Mahler's works.

ZB

[71 dB]

In order to make sure that you are actually hearing and processing everything. Are you telling me you have instant aural memory and could reproduce an entire Mahler symphony from first hearing? If not, you may want to look at a score for deeper understanding.

I have a bad memory. I can't memorise any musical piece but I can "learn" musical fragments. I don't know about others but that's how my head works.

he claims that he does.

I have never claimed that!