Mahler Mania, Rebooted

[Ghost of Baron Scarpia]

I find Frau Schäfer's Winterreise superb....

I also have and enjoy that one.

[calyptorhynchus]

I was listening to the 7th recently and it occurred to me that I hadn't heard anyone articulate what I think it a commonsense interpretation of the symphony. I think that people have seen the first four movements as exploring the psychological effect of night on the psyche, but then have been disappointed by the perceived banality of the fifth movement. But ever since I have known the work I have always interpreted the fifth movement not as waking up to reality in the morning, but as a series of delusive and glorious dreams. So when Mahler described the movement as saying 'the world is mine!', he should have added '...in your dreams'!

Does anyone else understand it that way?

[Alek Hidell]

Just added that Leopold Ludwig M9 to my Amazon wishlist. André's description of it as "the antithesis of all the neurotic farewells to the world we usually get" makes me think it might be right up my street. As I recently said on another thread, I've never bought into that maudlin notion that the Ninth is Mahler's "farewell." So an unsentimental reading (which is what I take André's meaning to be) would suit me just fine.

(And as I also said elsewhere, the Ninth continues to elude me somewhat. I love all of the others [well, except maybe the Eighth, but I'm hardly alone there], so my failure with this one - and I acknowledge that the failure is mine - continues to puzzle me.)

[JBS]

Just added that Leopold Ludwig M9 to my Amazon wishlist. André's description of it as "the antithesis of all the neurotic farewells to the world we usually get" makes me think it might be right up my street. As I recently said on another thread, I've never bought into that maudlin notion that the Ninth is Mahler's "farewell." So an unsentimental reading (which is what I take André's meaning to be) would suit me just fine.

(And as I also said elsewhere, the Ninth continues to elude me somewhat. I love all of the others [well, except maybe the Eighth, but I'm hardly alone there], so my failure with this one - and I acknowledge that the failure is mine - continues to puzzle me.)

If you want nonneurotic Ninths, I suggest Zinman and Maderna.
Zinman sounds to me like a serene ascent to the celestial spheres, so it is not exactly a non-farewell, but certainly not angsty.

The Eighth is a problem because there is no one sure great recording. All of them have flaws.  It's a piece with dozens of moving parts and hundreds of performers, and human nature means inevitably in every performance something will be off.

[Mirror Image]

Just added that Leopold Ludwig M9 to my Amazon wishlist. André's description of it as "the antithesis of all the neurotic farewells to the world we usually get" makes me think it might be right up my street. As I recently said on another thread, I've never bought into that maudlin notion that the Ninth is Mahler's "farewell." So an unsentimental reading (which is what I take André's meaning to be) would suit me just fine.

(And as I also said elsewhere, the Ninth continues to elude me somewhat. I love all of the others [well, except maybe the Eighth, but I'm hardly alone there], so my failure with this one - and I acknowledge that the failure is mine - continues to puzzle me.)

The 9th, along with the 3rd, are favorite Mahler symphonies. I think both represent a yin and yang in Mahler's oeuvre. They are both greatly contrasting symphonies with plenty to sink your teeth into. The 9th has had many great recordings over the years, but my favorite is Bernstein's on Deutsche Grammophon followed by the more 'emotionally-centered' (for lack of a better phrase) Chailly performance on Decca. I also greatly admire Haitink's first go-around with it on Philips. I'm not the biggest Mahler fan as, between my dad and I, he's actually the Mahlerian, but I can recommend performances of this symphony, because I do love it and think it's one of his greatest achievements along with the afore mentioned 3rd, but also the song cycles and Das Lied von der Erde. Of course, I agree that the 9th is far from Mahler's 'farewell to the world' as he didn't know how much time he had left, but I do think it's a deeply troubled work that, once it gets you hooked in, can take you on an emotional and remarkable journey.

[Alek Hidell]

If you want nonneurotic Ninths, I suggest Zinman and Maderna.
Zinman sounds to me like a serene ascent to the celestial spheres, so it is not exactly a non-farewell, but certainly not angsty.

Thanks, Jeffrey! Appreciate the recommendations. I have the Maderna recording - I should dig it back out. I think I've only listened to it once.

The 9th, along with the 3rd, are favorite Mahler symphonies. I think both represent a yin and yang in Mahler's oeuvre. They are both greatly contrasting symphonies with plenty to sink your teeth into. The 9th has had many great recordings over the years, but my favorite is Bernstein's on Deutsche Grammophon followed by the more 'emotionally-centered' (for lack of a better phrase) Chailly performance on Decca. I also greatly admire Haitink's first go-around with it on Philips. I'm not the biggest Mahler fan as, between my dad and I, he's actually the Mahlerian, but I can recommend performances of this symphony, because I do love it and think it's one of his greatest achievements along with the afore mentioned 3rd, but also the song cycles and Das Lied von der Erde. Of course, I agree that the 9th is far from Mahler's 'farewell to the world' as he didn't know how much time he had left, but I do think it's a deeply troubled work that, once it gets you hooked in, can take you on an emotional and remarkable journey.

The Third is my favorite, too; I'm not sure which one is up there with it - possibly the Seventh.

And thank you for the recommendations as well, M.I. I've heard the Bernstein and Haitink recordings - again once each, I believe. I think I have a mental block against the Bernstein: I always think about how people say there's an egregious miscue in it (during the final movement, I think it is) allegedly caused by an audience member having a medical emergency. So I'm unable to consider it a possible "go-to" performance. My hangup, I guess.

But I haven't heard Chailly. I'll keep it in mind.

[Mirror Image]

The Third is my favorite, too; I'm not sure which one is up there with it - possibly the Seventh.

And thank you for the recommendations as well, M.I. I've heard the Bernstein and Haitink recordings - again once each, I believe. I think I have a mental block against the Bernstein: I always think about how people say there's an egregious miscue in it (during the final movement, I think it is) allegedly caused by an audience member having a medical emergency. So I'm unable to consider it a possible "go-to" performance. My hangup, I guess.

But I haven't heard Chailly. I'll keep it in mind.

You're welcome. I think you'll find the Chailly may be right up your alley.

[Ken B]

You're welcome. I think you'll find the Chailly may be right up your alley.

Of the completish sets I have or have heard I think the Chailly is the best overall. Second: Boulez and Levine (which is not complete).

[Mirror Image]

Of the completish sets I have or have heard I think the Chailly is the best overall. Second: Boulez and Levine (which is not complete).

Yeah, my dad thinks highly of the Chailly as well.

[Madiel]

Hmm. I had been thinking that with Mahler I would pick up symphonies one at a time over time, but I'm increasingly giving consideration to Chailly. This is partly because I like his Brahms so much.

And partly because I think the covers are nice, though that's only true of the individual releases!

[Ken B]

Hmm. I had been thinking that with Mahler I would pick up symphonies one at a time over time, but I'm increasingly giving consideration to Chailly. This is partly because I like his Brahms so much.

And partly because I think the covers are nice, though that's only true of the individual releases!

For me it was a no brainer, as it was a special edition in Canada,at about $25 US. The sound is outstanding.

[Jo498]

Hmm. I had been thinking that with Mahler I would pick up symphonies one at a time over time, but I'm increasingly giving consideration to Chailly. This is partly because I like his Brahms so much.

And partly because I think the covers are nice, though that's only true of the individual releases!

Some of the individual releases also have interesting fillers but the box is more economical. (I have not heard any of his Mahler, I think.) The same is true of the Gielen on Haenssler, again only in the individual releases.

[Jo498]

If you want nonneurotic Ninths, I suggest Zinman and Maderna.

Maderna's 9th (BBC) is great but I remember it as quite intense.  I have not heard Zinman. Klemperer is (too) slow in the Burleske but also quite "objective". So is Gielen (there are at least two recordings), in better sound, with a slowish, non-hysterical Burleske and a flowing, rather "cool" finale.

[PerfectWagnerite]

For me it was a no brainer, as it was a special edition in Canada,at about $25 US. The sound is outstanding.

I would say Chailly is hard to beat also.

Among modern cycles I would pick Chailly, Gielen, and Bertini. All very different each equally convincing.

[Madiel]

Righto. Investigation of Chailly and Gielen is on my to-do list.

[Ghost of Baron Scarpia]

Generally have a high opinion of Chailly's Mahler, and especially his Bruckner cycle. Haven't heard his Brahms, although I have it.

[JBS]

I would say Chailly is hard to beat also.

Among modern cycles I would pick Chailly, Gielen, and Bertini. All very different each equally convincing.

Would Tennstedt and Inbal count as modern?  I would add them.  In fact, in terms of maintaining an evenly high level of quality over the length of the cycle, I would point to Inbal.  Inbal has no hits, meaning no individual performance that is clearly above the rest, but they are consistently high quality, and none are misses. And Boulez is worth more than a short look.

Among very recent cycles, I would suggest taking a look at Nott/Bamberger Symphoniker. I think he shares Inbal's ability to maintain a high level of quality in every symphony.    There is also Stenz/Gurzenich Orch.-Koln, but I thought that was merely good, not great.

[PerfectWagnerite]

Would Tennstedt and Inbal count as modern?  I would add them.  In fact, in terms of maintaining an evenly high level of quality over the length of the cycle, I would point to Inbal.  Inbal has no hits, meaning no individual performance that is clearly above the rest, but they are consistently high quality, and none are misses. And Boulez is worth more than a short look.

Among very recent cycles, I would suggest taking a look at Nott/Bamberger Symphoniker. I think he shares Inbal's ability to maintain a high level of quality in every symphony.    There is also Stenz/Gurzenich Orch.-Koln, but I thought that was merely good, not great.

Inbal is pretty good, but really not distinctive in any way. But if you want a cycle to study the score with I would say it is as good as any as everything comes through beautifully. The Nott and Stenz are on my list to listen to, just have not felt the need to listen to Mahler at this very moment.

[vers la flamme]

Bump for a great composer.

I have gone in this past year from utter indifference to full-blown obsession with the music of Gustav Mahler. I think he is certainly one of the greatest composers to ever have lived, despite having only written a couple dozen works. Almost every single one of them is at least worthy, and most of them are phenomenal, important works of art. I think he is, alongside his younger friend Arnold Schoenberg, one of the most psychological composers in all classical music. His music is all symbols and archetypes and double meanings. Sometimes when listening to his music, I am almost embarrassed for Mahler the man, because he has laid down so much of his life in the music, and is almost "naked" on the pages of the score, but at the same time I am always in awe of Mahler the artist, as he has created with his sounds and symbols something so poignant, so universal that it speaks to me, a Millennial, born near a century after his death, on a direct, personal level. I think, barring all cultural differences, we would have gotten along.

When I was first turned off by (what I saw as) the grandiosity and self-importance of his music, I think I was completely missing the point. Whatever his lofty ambitions (to paraphrase his words to a young Jean Sibelius, "a symphony must embrace the whole world"), I think he was always writing a more personal, psychical drama. Likewise, I think people are wrong when they say that he is melodramatic or that he is a complainer (as far as his music is concerned anyway; I'm not familiar enough with his real-life persona to say). He is a realist; a magical realist. His music reflects his world, no more, no less. He is one of the larger-than-life characters in all music, alongside Beethoven, Wagner, John Coltrane, Bob Dylan, David Bowie, etc etc.

Anyway, gushy essay over. I am listening to, for the first time, and enjoying the Bruno Walter/Columbia Symphony recording of Mahler's 1st symphony. The 3rd and 4th movements of this performance, I must say, are the best I've ever heard; only Kubelik's (wildly different) approach comes close. I think it really shows that Walter was a good friend of Mahler's, and idolized him as a conductor.

I have heard all of his symphonies but one: the 9th. I'm saving it for a later date and spending time with the other 8 (and DLvdE, perhaps his greatest work...?) for now. I will likely hear first the Bernstein/NYPO on Sony, as I love the rest of the set. Aside from this, what are some great recordings? I plan on checking out the Karajan/BPO live as I've heard great things about it.

Final note: I think his music does not benefit from overexposure. His symphonies must be taken in small doses, infrequently, or they can lose their power. Speaking for myself, anyway.

Well, I could go on and on about Mahler, but I'm going to stop now. Anyone else listening to his music lately...?

[relm1]

Bump for a great composer.

I have gone in this past year from utter indifference to full-blown obsession with the music of Gustav Mahler. I think he is certainly one of the greatest composers to ever have lived, despite having only written a couple dozen works. Almost every single one of them is at least worthy, and most of them are phenomenal, important works of art. I think he is, alongside his younger friend Arnold Schoenberg, one of the most psychological composers in all classical music. His music is all symbols and archetypes and double meanings. Sometimes when listening to his music, I am almost embarrassed for Mahler the man, because he has laid down so much of his life in the music, and is almost "naked" on the pages of the score, but at the same time I am always in awe of Mahler the artist, as he has created with his sounds and symbols something so poignant, so universal that it speaks to me, a Millennial, born near a century after his death, on a direct, personal level. I think, barring all cultural differences, we would have gotten along.

When I was first turned off by (what I saw as) the grandiosity and self-importance of his music, I think I was completely missing the point. Whatever his lofty ambitions (to paraphrase his words to a young Jean Sibelius, "a symphony must embrace the whole world"), I think he was always writing a more personal, psychical drama. Likewise, I think people are wrong when they say that he is melodramatic or that he is a complainer (as far as his music is concerned anyway; I'm not familiar enough with his real-life persona to say). He is a realist; a magical realist. His music reflects his world, no more, no less. He is one of the larger-than-life characters in all music, alongside Beethoven, Wagner, John Coltrane, Bob Dylan, David Bowie, etc etc.

Anyway, gushy essay over. I am listening to, for the first time, and enjoying the Bruno Walter/Columbia Symphony recording of Mahler's 1st symphony. The 3rd and 4th movements of this performance, I must say, are the best I've ever heard; only Kubelik's (wildly different) approach comes close. I think it really shows that Walter was a good friend of Mahler's, and idolized him as a conductor.

I have heard all of his symphonies but one: the 9th. I'm saving it for a later date and spending time with the other 8 (and DLvdE, perhaps his greatest work...?) for now. I will likely hear first the Bernstein/NYPO on Sony, as I love the rest of the set. Aside from this, what are some great recordings? I plan on checking out the Karajan/BPO live as I've heard great things about it.

Final note: I think his music does not benefit from overexposure. His symphonies must be taken in small doses, infrequently, or they can lose their power. Speaking for myself, anyway.

Well, I could go on and on about Mahler, but I'm going to stop now. Anyone else listening to his music lately...?

That is the thing about Mahler.  We are sort of like Roy Neary from Close Encounters of the Third Kind where everyone around us that we've known all our lives doesn't seem to understand what it is we've been privy to.  At first, I didn't like his music but when the light bulb went off, it was all consuming.  I've heard the same with others.  It is hard to explain other than to say he is probably the single most transcending composer ever.   For me, he was life changing, I hear that often in my line of work and there are many other very good (arguably great) composers you will never hear them described that way but Mahler's name is commonly referenced. 

I totally related to your post and how you described coming to understand his music.  I completely agree, he should be savored.  Not a fan of large orchestras putting on a symphony cycle in a month (LA Phil, Dudamel) I just believe this is music that should be experienced over years.  He is also one of those composers that I feel the need to revisit in different guises (interpretations).  There is no perfect version - his music supersedes all interpretations I have ever heard of it.  Some get it right in some places but none get it right throughout.  I keep hoping but haven't felt that yet.  I also lament the loss of his first four juvenilia symphonies that predate his mature "Titan" Symphony and hoping they might one day surface (I'm a dreamer and I know it's very, very unlikely).  Even if they are flawed, I haven't heard a single work of his that I didn't feel enriched from in some way. 

I do find his legacy very rich and strong with modern composers and in that I find enduring satisfaction.  It might not be overt, but it is detectable.