Mahler Mania, Rebooted

[aukhawk]

What does Mahler's 9th symphony mean to you? I think it might be the most ambiguous and challenging of all his works.

I took to Mahler's 9th straight away.  I find it far less 'challenging' than his 6th, 7th or 8th symphonies and to my ears it's a pretty straightforward work, beautifully conceived and constructed.  The inner movements don't seem any more or less incongruous than in many of his other symphonies, or in symphonies by others - Beethoven's Eroica for example.

I heard it first in Haitink's recording of around 1970, and I also attended a concert of the same forces, Haitink/Concertgebouw, at a RAH Prom.  Had to stand through the whole performance, but even so it was special, as is the recording.  By then I was also familiar with recordings of the 3rd (Bernstein), 4th (Kletzki) and 1st (Solti) acquired in that order**.  I like these four but I have never fully come to terms with any of the other symphonies, although I enjoy playing individual movements, which, since I am listening to recordings rather than attending concerts, I can do of course.
** I nearly forgot - also the Klagende Lied (Boulez).

I often listen to the first movement only, of the 2nd.  Even in performance Mahler recommended a pause for recovery of some minutes after this movement anyway - so I am happy to treat it as standalone music.
I often listen to the middle 3 movements of the 7th, avoiding the 1st and last movements which I think are awful.
I often listen to movements 3, 4 and 5 of the 3rd, without committing to the over-long outer movements.
I often play just the 1st movement of the 9th.  I still like Haitink's recording the best of all, though I have listened to many others.
I often 'cut' the final movement of the 4th.

I could wish Mahler had explored his cowbells effects a bit further - they are used with great restraint in the 6th and 7th symphonies and in a way that definitely leaves me wanting more!  The brief but telling 'bells' episode in the 1st movement of the 9th is like a development of the same theme.

[brunumb]

But the Ninth has always been problematic for me. I love the first movement, and the finale is all right (though when it comes to slow endings, I like the Third's more), but those two inner movements just don't do much for me.

We seem to be on exactly the same page when it comes to the 9th.  I have always felt that something was wrong with me as a Mahler obsessive when I couldn't see it as one of the great symphonies of the 20th century, let alone Mahler's greatest.  To me, Mahler seemed to have run out of inspiration in the middle movements, and with the final movement my reaction was something like "Oh no, not another fade to black adagio".  I'm just a musical numpty, so there could be something vital that I am missing.

[springrite]

I often listen to the middle 3 movements of the 7th, avoiding the 1st and last movements which I think are awful.

That last movement of the 7th is so awful that I almost think maybe it was intentional, an irony or spoof. When I think that way, it sounds absolutely perfect!

[Jo498]

There weren't too many 80-90 minutes symphonies written *before* 1910 either!
The popularity of Mahler and Bruckner should not deceive us, that a "typical" late/post romantic symphony was closer to 50 min than to 80. Actually, all of Bruckner's have been conducted in less than 80 min, although the 5th and 8th exceed this mark in slow readings.

Nevertheless, I don't think a longer-lived Mahler would have cut down the scale and written shorter "orchestral pieces" like his younger contemporaries.

[Jo498]

A rough model for the movement sequence in Mahler's 9th is very probably Tchaikovsky's 6th. This also has a slow finale and two scherzando/dance-Movements in the middle. To some extent Mahler's 2nd and 3rd already had "huge first movement in moderate tempo - bunch of shorter movements, often scherzando/dance/song - huge finale" in the 3rd the finale is also slow, in the 2nd it is a large movement with different tempi.
I encountered the first for the first time when I was ca. 17-18 and somewhat familiar with his 4th, 1st, 2nd, maybe also the 5th. The first couple of times I found the horn solo at the beginning simply ugly and couldn't make head or tail of the piece. But about two years later or so, I loved it and it has been my favorite Mahler symphony and my favorite 20th cent. symphony every since.

[Moonfish]

How do you guys like the Zinman cycle?  I'm sure it has been discussed somewhere in this thread, but the search function is acting up and perhaps there are new perspectives to harvest?

[asin] B0045TN2MK[/asin]

[vers la flamme]

^Prejudice on my behalf colors Zinman as somewhat of a lightweight–though I'll say this much, he is responsible for at least one landmark recording, and that is Górecki's third symphony with Dawn Upshaw and the London Sinfonietta–so I haven't heard so much as five minutes from his Mahler cycle. But I was just earlier today reading someone's good word regarding his recording of Mahler's 9th, in which the writer described his reading as the "anti-Bernstein", characterized by subtlety and slow build-up. This piqued my interest, but not enough for me to seek out his cycle in light of all of the many other great Mahler recordings I still must work through first.

If anyone can speak from an informed perspective on the matter, please do tell, as now I'm curious too.

So I've decided I'm going to listen to all of Mahler's symphonies in the coming few weeks, culminating in the completed 10th which I have not heard. I listened to the first symphony this morning, will listen to the second tomorrow, and so on until the end. I've never done this before. I'm hoping to gain some perspective on his development as an artist throughout time.

Has anyone done this before? Gratuitous though it may be, it's entirely possible in this age of high-definition recorded sound. Even worse yet, has anyone marathoned the entire 10 symphonies in a single day? 

[Moonfish]

^Prejudice on my behalf colors Zinman as somewhat of a lightweight–though I'll say this much, he is responsible for at least one landmark recording, and that is Górecki's third symphony with Dawn Upshaw and the London Sinfonietta–so I haven't heard so much as five minutes from his Mahler cycle. But I was just earlier today reading someone's good word regarding his recording of Mahler's 9th, in which the writer described his reading as the "anti-Bernstein", characterized by subtlety and slow build-up. This piqued my interest, but not enough for me to seek out his cycle in light of all of the many other great Mahler recordings I still must work through first.

If anyone can speak from an informed perspective on the matter, please do tell, as now I'm curious too.

So I've decided I'm going to listen to all of Mahler's symphonies in the coming few weeks, culminating in the completed 10th which I have not heard. I listened to the first symphony this morning, will listen to the second tomorrow, and so on until the end. I've never done this before. I'm hoping to gain some perspective on his development as an artist throughout time.

Has anyone done this before? Gratuitous though it may be, it's entirely possible in this age of high-definition recorded sound. Even worse yet, has anyone marathoned the entire 10 symphonies in a single day? 

It sounds like an exciting journey!   

[JBS]

^Prejudice on my behalf colors Zinman as somewhat of a lightweight–though I'll say this much, he is responsible for at least one landmark recording, and that is Górecki's third symphony with Dawn Upshaw and the London Sinfonietta–so I haven't heard so much as five minutes from his Mahler cycle. But I was just earlier today reading someone's good word regarding his recording of Mahler's 9th, in which the writer described his reading as the "anti-Bernstein", characterized by subtlety and slow build-up. This piqued my interest, but not enough for me to seek out his cycle in light of all of the many other great Mahler recordings I still must work through first.

If anyone can speak from an informed perspective on the matter, please do tell, as now I'm curious too.

So I've decided I'm going to listen to all of Mahler's symphonies in the coming few weeks, culminating in the completed 10th which I have not heard. I listened to the first symphony this morning, will listen to the second tomorrow, and so on until the end. I've never done this before. I'm hoping to gain some perspective on his development as an artist throughout time.

Has anyone done this before? Gratuitous though it may be, it's entirely possible in this age of high-definition recorded sound. Even worse yet, has anyone marathoned the entire 10 symphonies in a single day? 

I am probably the one who said that about Zinman's 9th. Frankly, it's the one truly excellent installment of his cycle. His 3rd and 4th are well above average, but the rest of the set is merely average, and in the case of the 10th, actually one of the worst on record.

I can't imagine listening to all of them in a single day. Just hearing two in the same day leaves me mentally exhausted.

BTW, re the 9th, Maderna/BBC Symphony O. is in a similar vein but not quite as good.

[Biffo]

^Prejudice on my behalf colors Zinman as somewhat of a lightweight–though I'll say this much, he is responsible for at least one landmark recording, and that is Górecki's third symphony with Dawn Upshaw and the London Sinfonietta–so I haven't heard so much as five minutes from his Mahler cycle. But I was just earlier today reading someone's good word regarding his recording of Mahler's 9th, in which the writer described his reading as the "anti-Bernstein", characterized by subtlety and slow build-up. This piqued my interest, but not enough for me to seek out his cycle in light of all of the many other great Mahler recordings I still must work through first.

If anyone can speak from an informed perspective on the matter, please do tell, as now I'm curious too.

So I've decided I'm going to listen to all of Mahler's symphonies in the coming few weeks, culminating in the completed 10th which I have not heard. I listened to the first symphony this morning, will listen to the second tomorrow, and so on until the end. I've never done this before. I'm hoping to gain some perspective on his development as an artist throughout time.

Has anyone done this before? Gratuitous though it may be, it's entirely possible in this age of high-definition recorded sound. Even worse yet, has anyone marathoned the entire 10 symphonies in a single day? 

So much to comment on so will start with Zinman's Mahler. I bought Symphony No  1 when it was first released. I found it beautifully played and recorded and that was about it. I wasn't tempted to any more instalments in the cycle. I got into trouble in another forum when I criticised his Beethoven symphony cycle so it is better to draw a veil over that. The only recording of his I would unreservedly recommend is Koechlin Jungle Book.

I have tried to listen to Mahler cycles on successive (or sometimes alternate) days but never got beyond No 7. No 8 is usually the sticking point, I need to be in a special mood to attempt it. Most recently I listened to the Gielen cycle with the same result - Nos 1 - 7 fairly quickly but not on successive days. After a few days rest I listened to No 8 and Das Lied von der Erde. Then I ran out of steam; it was several weeks before I tried Nos 9 & 10. Sadly, I found both disappointing, until then the cycle had been good or very good.

I couldn't even imagine listening to all the symphonies in one day. I the Amazon Classical Music forums (US and UK) there was at least one person who quite often made posting along the lines of 'listened to four recordings of Mahler 6 this morning' . I found this mind-boggling, one performance of Mahler 6 leaves me shattered and not wanting to listen to anything else for the rest of the day.

[Roasted Swan]

^Prejudice on my behalf colors Zinman as somewhat of a lightweight–.

I have avoided Zinman's Mahler because I had this precise response to his Strauss which was widely lauded.  I'm not sure what the point is in playing Strauss with its large and opulent scoring if the approach is anti-opulent/grandly sweeping!  Likewise I found the playing of the Swiss orchestra to be neat and of a high quality but with little sense of anything ever being on the edge - control for control's sake can be a limiting/inhibiting thing to my mind......

[SurprisedByBeauty]

How do you guys like the Zinman cycle?  I'm sure it has been discussed somewhere in this thread, but the search function is acting up and perhaps there are new perspectives to harvest?


Mahler 1-10
Zinman
RCA re-issue

Zinman's Mahler, either on SACD or in this cheap RCA re-issue, started out rather lukewarm; there's often a sense of someone accelerating but with the parking brake still engaged.

But there's plenty good about it, too, foremost (and perhaps most surprising) the 6th:

I know I didn't expect much of this, because I want my Sixth knock-out hard and biting and gritty and suspected that Zinman might go all soft and flabby on it. But when I heard that combo live at the Leipzig Mahler Fest (http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2011/05/mahler-festival-leipzig-zinman-tonhalle.html) I was very, very pleasantly surprised how good it sounded and how rough. Some of that seems to translate in the recording, one movement in. But he does of course take the movements in the correct, which is to say: wrong order.


#morninglistening to #Mahler w/@DavidZinman & #Tonhalle on RCA/@sonly_classical: Symphony ... http://ift.tt/2cj9DYk

kishnevi, if I remember correctly, contents that his 9th is one of the best in the cycle and one of his favorite 9ths, generally. Off the top of my head, I don't have a valid opinion of it; not even the memory of an opinion. Must re-listen.

Hurwitz was high on his 1st: https://www.classicstoday.com/review/review-13597/, 4th https://www.classicstoday.com/review/review-14244/?search=1, 3rd https://www.classicstoday.com/review/review-14003/?search=1, 6th https://www.classicstoday.com/review/review-14740/?search=1, not so much on his 9th https://www.classicstoday.com/review/review-16072/?search=1 and 7th https://www.classicstoday.com/review/review-15331/?search=1, of Goodish opinion re: the Second https://www.classicstoday.com/review/review-13788/?search=1, and didn't think much of the 5th.

I remember finding the 4th really OK, the 2nd quite good, the 3rd excellent. I also still need to listen to his Olson 10th.

[aukhawk]

So I've decided I'm going to listen to all of Mahler's symphonies in the coming few weeks, culminating in the completed 10th which I have not heard. I listened to the first symphony this morning, will listen to the second tomorrow, and so on until the end. I've never done this before. I'm hoping to gain some perspective on his development as an artist throughout time.

A bit late now since you've already listened to it, but I do think that in the right hands (Honeck springs to mind) the very opening 4 minutes of the 1st Symphony sounds like, well, the opening of the entire symphony cycle.  Similar to the opening of Das Rheingold starting off the entire 4 operas of Der Ring.

[JBS]

kishnevi, if I remember correctly, contents that his 9th is one of the best in the cycle and one of his favorite 9ths, generally. Off the top of my head, I don't have a valid opinion of it; not even the memory of an opinion. Must re-listen.

Nota bene: kishnevi was my old name, before the Great Server Switch.

[SurprisedByBeauty]

Nota bene: kishnevi was my old name, before the Great Server Switch.

Ah, I see. Well, JSB is a much better handle, if I may say. 

[Cato]

What does Mahler's 9th Symphony mean to you? I think it might be the most ambiguous and challenging of all his works.

Well, what is the meaning of a walk through the hills and meadows, or the mountains, or the gorges?  What is the meaning of a journey to a faraway land?

After nearly 60 years of hearing the symphony, which is a great favorite, and over 60 years of listening to Classical Music in general, I can say that I have no idea of what it means to me.   

For my own works, I have no idea what my Trio New Year's Resolution means.  I do know that my choral work, Exaudi me, is a lamentation, using a Latin prayer of hope and contrition.  But...what does it mean?  I again cannot say.

Mahler's Ninth Symphony produces a flurry of memories, images, emotions, but they do not cohere into a meaning of any kind.  I believe Mahler called his symphonies universes or worlds.   While listening to the Ninth Symphony, you are exploring that faraway land, where you will find surprises, fulfill a sense of discovery, and have all sorts of other experiences.  And similar to visiting a faraway country for the twentieth time, where you will find people and things changed from your last visit, your twentieth visit to this symphony will bring you both the old and the new, a universe in a kaleidoscope.

And what do the images in a kaleidoscope mean, or the sounds of this symphony?  Perhaps you will be positive that they mean something, something inchoate, something vaguely comprehensible, something just beyond Kant's Ding an sich, and your mind will tell you that you understand...some thing.

And then you turn the kaleidoscope, or the music continues, and that sense of comprehension fades away.

Those are my thoughts.  Yours may or will be quite different, which trait is the nature and glory of Art! 

[Moonfish]

Well, what is the meaning of a walk through the hills and meadows, or the mountains, or the gorges?  What is the meaning of a journey to a faraway land?

After nearly 60 years of hearing the symphony, which is a great favorite, and over 60 years of listening to Classical Music in general, I can say that I have no idea of what it means to me.   

For my own works, I have no idea what my Trio New Year's Resolution means.  I do know that my choral work, Exaudi me, is a lamentation, using a Latin prayer of hope and contrition.  But...what does it mean?  I again cannot say.

Mahler's Ninth Symphony produces a flurry of memories, images, emotions, but they do not cohere into a meaning of any kind.  I believe Mahler called his symphonies universes or worlds.   While listening to the Ninth Symphony, you are exploring that faraway land, where you will find surprises, fulfill a sense of discovery, and have all sorts of other experiences.  And similar to visiting a faraway country for the twentieth time, where you will find people and things changed from your last visit, your twentieth visit to this symphony will bring you both the old and the new, a universe in a kaleidoscope.

And what do the images in a kaleidoscope mean, or the sounds of this symphony?  Perhaps you will be positive that they mean something, something inchoate, something vaguely comprehensible, something just beyond Kant's Ding an sich, and your mind will tell you that you understand...some thing.

And then you turn the kaleidoscope, or the music continues, and that sense of comprehension fades away.

Those are my thoughts.  Yours may or will be quite different, which trait is the nature and glory of Art!

Hear! Hear!

Ah, Cato! I love your philosophical stance and the lens you use to ponder the meaning of music! 

[Cato]

Hear! Hear!

Ah, Cato! I love your philosophical stance and the lens you use to ponder the meaning of music!

Many thanks for the nice response!

[André]

I enjoyed reading this.   

+ 1

I love the image of the kaleidoscope. Music is reborn every time you hear it...

[calyptorhynchus]

That last movement of the 7th is so awful that I almost think maybe it was intentional, an irony or spoof. When I think that way, it sounds absolutely perfect!

That's how i've always understood it too.