Mahler Mania, Rebooted

[knight66]

I have a live Boulez M8 from over 30 years ago. I like what Boulez does, a very plastic approach, also exciting. Perhaps over a generation he has rethought it and not to its advantage.

Mike

[DavidRoss]

I still haven't heard a recording I liked, for sure, more than Solti's 8th (same with the 7th). I suppose they have to be 'turbocharged' for me, or else they're not very exciting.

That's one of the cool things about Mahler's "everything including the kitchen sink" approach to most of his symphonies (the 4th an exception, methinks):  there's something for everyone, from headbangers to chamber music fans.

[Wilhelm Richard]

Forget ALL of those recordings of the 8th! 
Tennstedt is the way to go.
Based on my previous likes and dislikes, while exploring various other recordings I was certain Solti's (whose often questioned approach I am a fan of in just about everything) would be the one for me...not so in this instance.  Tennstedt beats them all...the organic growth he leads until the final climax is absolutely tremendous.

(Though I still keep Solti on hand for the sheer NOISE of that massive choir and organ  )

[knight66]

Tennstedt beats them all.........

What all? Have you heard the live Morris, Hornstein, Boulez.....the Wit, Bertini or the Sinopoli?

Mike

[jlaurson]

I still haven't heard a recording I liked, for sure, more than Solti's 8th (same with the 7th). I suppose they have to be 'turbocharged' for me, or else they're not very exciting.

If "turbocharged" is how you need it, surely Neeme Jaervi's account is the one to go with.

(It's actually much better than some of its detractors claim or then I would have thought before I actually listened to it.
Speaking of which: Listening to a recording is, despite being considered "optional" in this forum, still the
best way to attain an opinion about a recording, after all.   )

[Wilhelm Richard]

Tennstedt beats them all.........

What all? Have you heard the live Morris, Hornstein, Boulez.....the Wit, Bertini or the Sinopoli?

Yes on all of them but Wit and Morris.
Do some find it unacceptable that a Tennstedt version (of anything) could be the most preferred?

[greg]

Forget ALL of those recordings of the 8th! 
Tennstedt is the way to go.
Based on my previous likes and dislikes, while exploring various other recordings I was certain Solti's (whose often questioned approach I am a fan of in just about everything) would be the one for me...not so in this instance.  Tennstedt beats them all...the organic growth he leads until the final climax is absolutely tremendous.

(Though I still keep Solti on hand for the sheer NOISE of that massive choir and organ  )

The second movement of Tennstedt's 8th is the only part of his cycle I haven't gotten to yet. I've listened to the 1st movement a couple of times, and it hasn't grown on me.

[knight66]

Yes on all of them but Wit and Morris.
Do some find it unacceptable that a Tennstedt version (of anything) could be the most preferred?

No, but had no idea what 'all' meant, apart from Solti and for 'all' I knew, it might have meant a couple of versions.

As to Jarvi, I was in choir for a performance he conducted. In all I sang the piece about eight times, including for Boulez, the Jarvi was undoubtetedly good and certainly better than Leinsdorf, Gibson, Rudel or Maazel. The weak area was the opening of the 2nd Mvt, where he did noting with the orchestral introduction.

Mike

[Renfield]

Forget ALL of those recordings of the 8th! 
Tennstedt is the way to go.
Based on my previous likes and dislikes, while exploring various other recordings I was certain Solti's (whose often questioned approach I am a fan of in just about everything) would be the one for me...not so in this instance.  Tennstedt beats them all...the organic growth he leads until the final climax is absolutely tremendous.

Absolutely - and thank you for beating me to the punch. I love and adore the Mahler 8th, perhaps only second to the Mahler 9th among his canon, and that is largely because of Klaus Tennstedt. His is the reading that made the planets and suns revolve in my head, not in terms of 'sonic spectacular', but in terms of an attempt at 'mystical communion' not at all unlike the finale of the 2nd symphony.

I could probably write a number of paragraphs on the 8th, and on Tennstedt's reading in particular (especially the live one on DVD, which is possibly even better than the CD release), but I am sure most would be - perhaps rightly - tempted to skip them.

So I'll just note, for those wanting to make sense of the 8th as an organic whole, if any sense is there to be made, I've only decisively felt it in Tennstedt. On the other hand, I also admire Boulez, so perhaps it is my personal expectations that colour this judgement.


[For the record, besides the 2 Tennstedt's, I've heard - in no particular order - Chailly, Sinopoli, the 3 Bernsteins, Boulez, Kubelik, Solti, Bertini, Rattle, Abbado, Horenstein, Gielen, and Neumann (bleh); and I also own Maazel and Gergiev, still on the waiting list.]

[Cato]

Okay guys: I just listened again to the DGG Boulez version of the Eighth.

I can see where some people want ever more volume and drive: Boulez, however, let's you hear all the music.  There is a chamber clarity to many of the sections.

Especially thrilling is the conclusion of Part I, where the choirs' ascension is more astonishing than any other recording I have ever heard, including the Solti, probably because Boulez slows things down a bit and focuses the ear on them.

The Finale I also find marvelous: I cranked it up on my BOSE Surround Sound ( Mrs. Cato is gone today!   0:)  ) and have no complaints.  The third note on the trumpet calls jumping a ninth is slightly less loud each time, again giving this feeling of ascension.  I can understand where some want it to be at a near-hysteric volume, like the D-Clarinets in the Sixth, but there is a case to be made for this idea.

[jlaurson]

Okay guys: I just listened again to the DGG Boulez version of the Eighth.

I can see where some people want ever more volume and drive: Boulez, however, let's you hear all the music.  There is a chamber clarity to many of the sections.

But for that chamber clarity, how about Abbado's recording?

Ahhh... screw my listening plan... (which would have been Reger): I'll pop in a Mahler 8th now, too.

[Cato]

But for that chamber clarity, how about Abbado's recording?

I can believe it: I heard him conduct the Berlin Philharmonic at a concert with Arnold Schoenberg's Pelleas und Melisande and was astounded by the clarity of all the dense counterpoint in the score, which some conductors treat as R. Straussian mush.  One of the greatest performances of the work I have ever heard.

[mahler10th]

Now - there is an extremely interesting and fantastic recording of his 5th with Houston on tour in Vienna in 1992. This one is fascinating interpretively and as such draws me back to it again and again, plus the playing just catches fire by the 2nd mvmt and they really smoke on through to the end.

Eschenbach goes further than he should with many, many things in that performance, though they follow him perfectly and it certainly makes you think of the music in a different way. I honestly can't say that it doesn't work on some level - it is so musical and committed throughout. There are sections in the 2nd mvmt where he just pulls time like taffy, and no more so than in the Adagietto which is very broad and hangs in the air as a misty timeless haze, it is really unique and special. The Philly recording is far less radical, more mellow and straightforward, but he still makes some of the same points.

Here is the Houston recording, was only on a private subscriber CD:
http://rapidshare.com/files/239815244/M5EschenbachHouston1992Vienna.rar

I am downloading that now and look forward to a good listen.

[Wanderer]

Okay guys: I just listened again to the DGG Boulez version of the Eighth.
I can see where some people want ever more volume and drive: Boulez, however, let's you hear all the music.  There is a chamber clarity to many of the sections.

I totally agree with this. Boulez casually excels in the kind of x-ray transparency that e.g. Rattle obviously struggles for but fails dismally most times he tries.

[jlaurson]

I totally agree with this. Boulez casually excels in the kind of x-ray transparency that e.g. Rattle obviously struggles for but fails dismally most times he tries.

That's in any case the easy stereotype of Boulez. And absolutely true for his (excellent) 3rd. But not at all, for example, for his 1st, 5th, 6th, which are (excellent) gushing and warm-blooded beasts. Nor for his 2nd. Well, I'll get around to his Eight plenty more times before saving my judgement of it as anything more than cursory & temporary.

[Wanderer]

That's in any case the easy stereotype of Boulez. And absolutely true for his (excellent) 3rd. But not at all, for example, for his 1st, 5th, 6th, which are (excellent) gushing and warm-blooded beasts. Nor for his 2nd. Well, I'll get around to his Eight plenty more times before saving my judgement of it as anything more than cursory & temporary.

I did not mean it as a negative (neither did I primarily mean it for his Mahler recordings - of which I only own his renditions of the Eighth, the Third and the Second). I find that in his best moments he seems able to combine transparency and effusiveness.

[Catison]

Great interview from the Mahler blog.

http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=5280231

[DavidRoss]

For those who haven't discovered that site yet, it's http://www.universaledition.com/mahler/, already with several interesting brief interviews with leading conductors about Mahler's music and their relationships to it.  It's interesting that so many--Barenboim, Boulez, Welser-Möst--started with the 5th.  It's interesting that all of these men, and Gatti, too, express concern about going too far in using Mahler as a springboard for the conductor's self-expression, that they are respectful of Mahler's carefully worked out directions re. dynamics and tempo, and they recognize that the careful balances and finely crafted architecture of the music can be easily overwhelmed by such self-indulgence.  Boulez and Barenboim's comments about Mahler's judicious dynamic balance between instruments or groups of instruments are instructive--I think this is what W-M was referring to as the finesse of his instrumentation.  And I really liked Barenboim's observation that Mahler is one of the very few symphonists whose symphonies each have a distinctive idiom, which he called "the most wonderful thing" about Mahler's music.

I hope they will add interviews with MTT and Fischer and Abbado and Jansons and Chailly and others (Barshai!) as time goes on, for the plan is to keep adding to the site over the next year+ celebrating the centennial of Mahler's passing.

[greg]

What does everyone think about Horenstein's recordings?
After hearing about how much the 3rd and the 8th are admired (as if they are some of the greatest recordings out there), I found out that he's recorded all of them, even though I couldn't find a box set that exists.
Out of curiosity, what does his 3rd and 8th sound like? I might consider checking them out.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

What does everyone think about Horenstein's recordings?
After hearing about how much the 3rd and the 8th are admired (as if they are some of the greatest recordings out there), I found out that he's recorded all of them, even though I couldn't find a box set that exists.

I don't think he recorded all of them. I don't think there are any recordings by him of the 2nd and the 5th.

I had the famous 3rd in its LP incarnation. It's a good performance, and gives a greater sense of unity than most other performances I've heard. However, I can think of a number of 3rds that are better. I suspect a lot of people rate it so highly for nostalgic reasons - there weren't a lot of Mahler 3rds when it was released, and Horenstein had a "cult conductor" reputation, which added to the mystique I think.

I recommend highly his 1st with the LSO, however - if only for the finale (especially the coda), which is quite spectacular.