Mahler Mania, Rebooted

[Lisztianwagner]

Mahler: Symphony No. 9 [Hybrid SACD - DSD]
Gustav Mahler (Composer)
David Zinman (Conductor)
Zurich Tonhalle Orchestra (Orchestra)



Zinman's M9 reminds me somewhat of Nott's recent account, but sounds like it was created on a bigger scale, or larger canvas.  Nott's is perhaps a little more personal in tone, but Zinman's interpretation is both personal, AND cosmic.

You can be rest assured about the climaxes...the sonics and orchestra are more than up to the challenge.  As a matter of fact, Zinman's orchestra is the one element that puts him slightly ahead of Nott.  Nott's M9 is like a sister to Zinman's account.  I like both, and both are of the highest standard in playing, tone, and drama for an M9 of the 21st Century.  I have a feeling you will be very impressed with the playing.

I still love the Rattle Berlin M9, but it can't compete in terms of sonics. Zinman, Nott, Oue, and Thomas are the creme of the crop in terms of sonics.

The third climax in the first movement may be the most impressive sonically, in terms of hearing all that is in the score here.  The rusticity of the minuet will make you smile, again, I have to mention how fine the orchestra is, especially in dynamics.

The blooming crescendos in the Rondo will surprise you. AND the final climax in the Adagio will blow your mind. The sonics are perhaps the best of the cycle. Matching and perhaps exceeding his M3, M6 and M8 recordings.

The tempos, again, are like Nott, meaning that Zinman is patient, and there is no unnecessary rushing during any of the climaxes, thank God.  I like how the climaxes in I. are not rushed.  The tempos are treated with thought, and care, during the transitions all over the score.  Energy is not wasted, and this brings huge dividends later as the score progresses movement to movement.

Thanks for the great description, Leo, it's very interesting! I've enjoyed Zinman's recordings of Mahler No.5 & 6 very much, I would like to listen to the 9th symphony too.

[Leo K.]

I had a few minutes to go back and catch the comments on the Tchaikovsky Sixth and Mahler's time in New York.

Mahler might have conducted it out of mercenary considerations: that is a possibility.  But I suspect that after the third or fourth time he might have balked.  And why bother to conduct it in Rome, where the New York dowagers were not involved?

I suspect that as time passed Mahler re-evaluated his attitude, and hearing the work with older ears he discovered admirable things.

The egos of artists can be strange things, and may prevent them from admitting at first that another composer - and every composer is a rival suitor for the ears, hearts, and souls of the audience - has produced a great work.

I noticed in the quotation from Bauer-Lechner this line:

I am betting that should be homophonic instead!   0:)

I am embarrassed over my typo! Thanks for correcting that Cato, and thanks for thoughtful post. I am also of
the opinion that Mahler regarded the Tchaikovsky 6 in better terms over time. This similarity between Tchaikovsky's 6 and Mahler's 9 is endlessly fascinating to me personally.

[Cato]

I am embarrassed over my typo! Thanks for correcting that Cato, and thanks for thoughtful post.

I am also of the opinion that Mahler regarded the Tchaikovsky 6 in better terms over time. This similarity between Tchaikovsky's 6 and Mahler's 9 is endlessly fascinating to me personally.

Well, Freud would have his own theories,     but more prosaically one sees that "B"  and "N" are right next to each other!

It is interesting that an Ergebung vor dem Tode haunts both works, even though both composers were working on large-scale compositions for the future.

[trung224]

Mahler: Symphony No. 9 [Hybrid SACD - DSD]
Gustav Mahler (Composer)
David Zinman (Conductor)
Zurich Tonhalle Orchestra (Orchestra)



Zinman's M9 reminds me somewhat of Nott's recent account, but sounds like it was created on a bigger scale, or larger canvas.  Nott's is perhaps a little more personal in tone, but Zinman's interpretation is both personal, AND cosmic.

You can be rest assured about the climaxes...the sonics and orchestra are more than up to the challenge.  As a matter of fact, Zinman's orchestra is the one element that puts him slightly ahead of Nott.  Nott's M9 is like a sister to Zinman's account.  I like both, and both are of the highest standard in playing, tone, and drama for an M9 of the 21st Century.  I have a feeling you will be very impressed with the playing.

I still love the Rattle Berlin M9, but it can't compete in terms of sonics. Zinman, Nott, Oue, and Thomas are the creme of the crop in terms of sonics.

The third climax in the first movement may be the most impressive sonically, in terms of hearing all that is in the score here.  The rusticity of the minuet will make you smile, again, I have to mention how fine the orchestra is, especially in dynamics.

The blooming crescendos in the Rondo will surprise you. AND the final climax in the Adagio will blow your mind. The sonics are perhaps the best of the cycle. Matching and perhaps exceeding his M3, M6 and M8 recordings.

The tempos, again, are like Nott, meaning that Zinman is patient, and there is no unnecessary rushing during any of the climaxes, thank God.  I like how the climaxes in I. are not rushed.  The tempos are treated with thought, and care, during the transitions all over the score.  Energy is not wasted, and this brings huge dividends later as the score progresses movement to movement.

Excellent review, Leo K. I am not fan of Zinman, but his Mahler 9  is very good, with highlight on clarity and clear voice. I think his approach suits best with the somewhat modern-influence symphony like the Seventh, Eight and Ninth. Even though, I still dissatisfies with the first movement of the Ninth, when despair feeling and emotion contrast was solely lacking.

[Leo K.]

    Excellent review, Leo K. I am not fan of Zinman, but his Mahler 9  is very good, with highlight on clarity and clear voice. I think his approach suits best with the somewhat modern-influence symphony like the Seventh, Eight and Ninth. Even though, I still dissatisfies with the first movement of the Ninth, when despair feeling and emotion contrast was solely lacking.

Thank you Trung, I appreciate your thoughts, I also feel Zinman is highly successful in 7,8 and 9.

Zinman's M3 is possibly my favorite of his cycle. It's a slow grower but it hits you after numerous listens!

[Karl Henning]

Early on, Schoenberg did not think particularly well of Mahler, IIRC.  And later, he changed his mind.

. . . Here I must confess that I, too, at first considered Mahler's themes banal.  I consider it important to admit that I was Saul before I became Paul, since it may thence be deduced that those 'fine discriminations' of which certain opponents are so proud were not foreign to me. But they are foreign to me now, ever since my increasingly intense perception of the beauty and magnificence of Mahler's work has brought me to the point of admitting that it is not fine discrimination, but, on the contrary, the most blatant lack of the power of discrimination, which produces such judgements. I had found Mahler's themes banal, although the whole work had always made a profound impression on me. Today, with the worst will in the world, I could not react this way. Consider this: if they were really banal I should find them far more banal today than formerly.  For banal means rustic, and describes something which belongs to a low grade of culture, to no culture at all. In lower grades of culture there is found, not what is absolutely false or bad, but what used to be right, what is obsolete, what has been outlived, what is no longer true. The peasant does not behave badly, but archaically, just as those of a higher rank behaved before they knew better. Therefore, the banal represents a backward state of ethics and state of mind, which was once the state of mind of the higher ranks; it was not banal from the beginning, but became banal only when it was pushed aside by new and better customs. But it cannot rise up again — once it is banal, it must stay banal. And if I now maintain that I can no longer find these themes banal, they can never have been so; for a banal idea, an idea which appears obsolete and worn-out to me, can only appear more banal on closer acquaintance — but in no case noble. But if now I discover that the oftener I look at these ideas the more new beauties and noble traits are added to them, doubt is no longer possible: the idea is the opposite of banal. It is not something that we were long ago done with and cannot misunderstand, but something the deepest meaning of which is as yet far from completely revealed, something so profound that we have not become aware of more than its superficial appearance. And, in fact, this has happened not only to Mahler, but also to nearly all other great composers, who had to submit to the accusation of banality. I call to mind only Wagner and Brahms. I think that the change in my feeling provides a better yardstick than the judgement on first hearing which everyone is very quick to come out with as soon as he runs into a situation which he really does not understand.

From Style and Idea: Selected Writings of Arnold Schoenberg pp.455-456.

[kishnevi]

Zinman's M9 has been my favorite recording of that symphony since I first heard it, principally on the strength of the last movement.

[NJ Joe]

Hello.  I'm going to be honest:  it has taken me longer to get my head around Mahler than any other composer.  I tried on and off over the course of several years, purchasing various recordings of several different symphonies. Don't know what it was...perhaps my own expectations of what the music was going to be...but I just couldn't connect.  It was actually quite frustrating.

I'm certain it was partly because I couldn't or wouldn't accept his "everything but the kitchen sink" approach...the extreme mood changes within a matter of minutes...the roller coaster ride was too much.

But about three months ago, it finally began to click. On the way to work one morning I heard part of a recording of the 9th symphony, preceded by commentary about the work.  I really enjoyed what I heard. I e-mailed the DJ and asked who it was, and he replied that it was Benjamin Zander.  Not long after, I purchased the remastered Bernstein NYPO set. I started with the third symphony and was immediately captivated. It's been in my regular rotation ever since. 

I have since purchased several recordings recommended on this thread and am discovering this great music for the first time.  It is an extraordinary experience.

[kishnevi]

Dudamel is taking another stab at Mahler.

Official release date is next week. 

Searching for the image on Amazon,  I noticed that last year's performance of the Eighth in Caracas was released on DVD.

I'm pretty sure at least one GMGer was impressed by his Eighth. 

Hopefully these will be better than his First, which is also available on DVD.   

[Leo K.]

Hello.  I'm going to be honest:  it has taken me longer to get my head around Mahler than any other composer.  I tried on and off over the course of several years, purchasing various recordings of several different symphonies. Don't know what it was...perhaps my own expectations of what the music was going to be...but I just couldn't connect.  It was actually quite frustrating.

I'm certain it was partly because I couldn't or wouldn't accept his "everything but the kitchen sink" approach...the extreme mood changes within a matter of minutes...the roller coaster ride was too much.

But about three months ago, it finally began to click. On the way to work one morning I heard part of a recording of the 9th symphony, preceded by commentary about the work.  I really enjoyed what I heard. I e-mailed the DJ and asked who it was, and he replied that it was Benjamin Zander.  Not long after, I purchased the remastered Bernstein NYPO set. I started with the third symphony and was immediately captivated. It's been in my regular rotation ever since. 

I have since purchased several recordings recommended on this thread and am discovering this great music for the first time.  It is an extraordinary experience.

Good post, and I have to say, it has also taken me years to listen to Mahler, and my views on the music have changed over time. I struggle with him sometimes, yet his symphonies occupy more of my collection that anything else!

Mahler is the modern composer par excellence. His music mirrors almost all our current hopes and anxieties, and this it does for many, many people. A new generation of scholars tells us it is about love. Can't it be both? What is more quintessentially Romantic than this mingling of love and mortality? Mahler's symphonies are excitingly close to our contemporary life and reality. We critical mindset doesn't easily allow for mixed emotions. Even in music, we seem limited to only letting music be one thing at a time.

Many years ago, many conductors and musicologists thought the Adagietto of the Fifth Symphony was about death, now (in a way) that feels truthful. This state of being seems far removed from our modern mindset- we live in an era of taking sides. Life today is held to be happy or sad, not happy and sad. Our public discourse says Gustav Mahler is the composer of contradictions and paradoxes. He is the composer of ambiguities, contrasts, complexities and cognitive dissonance. A huge part of Mahler's genius is in his ability to create music in which seemingly incompatible ideas are able to coexist.

On the other hand, Mahler's music appears to be a continuation of Joseph Haydn, a gigantic-romantic version of Papa. Mahler's need to sweep up folk song, military musical recollections and country dances to form his symphonies put him surprisingly close to Haydn who, in his Symphony No. 100, was collecting earlier artifacts for similar reasons. Haydn brought "Turkish" military sounds to his London audience to spice music already livened by Austrian country dances and courtly musical references.

In both there is a sense of singing melodic line — of melodies rooted in song, as in Mahler's early symphonies, or in the chamber music of Haydn's. Another is a penchant for wresting substantial music from concise thematic ideas, for "developing" brief motifs in consequential ways. Finally, the works of each composer often entail arresting musical dramas. and anxieties, and this it does for many, many people. Mahler's own compositions — his great symphonies and song cycles — seem, on first consideration, quite unlike those of Haydn. In contrast to the Classical proportions, demeanor and economy of Haydn's work, Mahler created on an expansive scale and ventured extremes of musical expression. But for all their superficial differences, the music of Haydn and Mahler displays a triumphant conclusion only at the end of a long and surprising musical journey.

[NJ Joe]

Good post, and I have to say, it has also taken me years to listen to Mahler, and my views on the music have changed over time. I struggle with him sometimes, yet his symphonies occupy more of my collection that anything else!

Mahler is the modern composer par excellence. His music mirrors almost all our current hopes and anxieties, and this it does for many, many people. A new generation of scholars tells us it is about love. Can't it be both? What is more quintessentially Romantic than this mingling of love and mortality? Mahler's symphonies are excitingly close to our contemporary life and reality. We critical mindset doesn't easily allow for mixed emotions. Even in music, we seem limited to only letting music be one thing at a time.

Many years ago, many conductors and musicologists thought the Adagietto of the Fifth Symphony was about death, now (in a way) that feels truthful. This state of being seems far removed from our modern mindset- we live in an era of taking sides. Life today is held to be happy or sad, not happy and sad. Our public discourse says Gustav Mahler is the composer of contradictions and paradoxes. He is the composer of ambiguities, contrasts, complexities and cognitive dissonance. A huge part of Mahler's genius is in his ability to create music in which seemingly incompatible ideas are able to coexist.

On the other hand, Mahler's music appears to be a continuation of Joseph Haydn, a gigantic-romantic version of Papa. Mahler's need to sweep up folk song, military musical recollections and country dances to form his symphonies put him surprisingly close to Haydn who, in his Symphony No. 100, was collecting earlier artifacts for similar reasons. Haydn brought "Turkish" military sounds to his London audience to spice music already livened by Austrian country dances and courtly musical references.

In both there is a sense of singing melodic line — of melodies rooted in song, as in Mahler's early symphonies, or in the chamber music of Haydn's. Another is a penchant for wresting substantial music from concise thematic ideas, for "developing" brief motifs in consequential ways. Finally, the works of each composer often entail arresting musical dramas. and anxieties, and this it does for many, many people. Mahler's own compositions — his great symphonies and song cycles — seem, on first consideration, quite unlike those of Haydn. In contrast to the Classical proportions, demeanor and economy of Haydn's work, Mahler created on an expansive scale and ventured extremes of musical expression. But for all their superficial differences, the music of Haydn and Mahler displays a triumphant conclusion only at the end of a long and surprising musical journey.

Thanks Leo K., for this fantastic post.  The bolded lines really nail it for me.  I think that's what was giving me the most trouble.  At times, the music seemed to be almost like a film score in terms of those contrasts.  I was trying to pigeon-hole the music into how I thought a symphony should be constructed.  Once I was able to free myself of those preconceived notions and let the music flow, it was unlocked.

[Marc]

Thanks Leo K., for this fantastic post.  The bolded lines really nail it for me.  I think that's what was giving me the most trouble.  At times, the music seemed to be almost like a film score in terms of those contrasts.  I was trying to pigeon-hole the music into how I thought a symphony should be constructed.  Once I was able to free myself of those preconceived notions and let the music flow, it was unlocked.

I got 'spanked' once (in some Dutch music board) when I said that I liked Mahler because he was ablo to compose both deeply felt high class art and kitsch in one and the same piece. Man, people went mad and angry!

But, to me, Mahler's dualism is still the main attractive force in his music. Sometimes I think his personality could be a very intense combination (and confrontation) between German Tiefernst and Jewish irony.

[mszczuj]

We critical mindset doesn't easily allow for mixed emotions. Even in music, we seem limited to only letting music be one thing at a time.

This made me very curious about who is this yours "we"  - as I have listened to some amount of music (probably about 10 000 of records) and really can't remind any minute of experience in which music was for me only one thing at a time.

[sheffmark]

Hi all!
I was just wondering if there is a right and proper way to start listening to Mahler.
I have symphony 4 & 5 and love both but should i have started at no 1 and finished at 10?
Or doesn't it matter?
Which ones are easiest to get into as a new Mahler fan?
Which ones are the best?
Thanks all for your time!

Mark.

[madaboutmahler]

Hi all!
I was just wondering if there is a right and proper way to start listening to Mahler.
I have symphony 4 & 5 and love both but should i have started at no 1 and finished at 10?
Or doesn't it matter?
Which ones are easiest to get into as a new Mahler fan?
Which ones are the best?
Thanks all for your time!

Mark.

Hi Mark, good to see you around here again! Don't worry! My two first Mahler symphonies were no.4 and 5 also, as I saw them both in the same concert at a BBC Prom, Gergiev conducting the World Orchestra for Peace, a few years ago. I then saw Maazel do both 1 and 6 live the following spring, and following that I was a dedicated Mahlerian convert! I don't think it's too important to listen to them in order. Although, I would say definitely leave no.9 (and 10) till last, as that will give you the best possible appreciation of the extreme power and emotion in the two.
I would say listen to either 1, 2 or 6 next. Favourite recordings: 1 - Jansons, 2 - Tennstedt and 6 - Solti.

[jlaurson]

Hi all!
I was just wondering if there is a right and proper way to start listening to Mahler.
I have symphony 4 & 5 and love both but should i have started at no 1 and finished at 10?
Or doesn't it matter?
Which ones are easiest to get into as a new Mahler fan?
Which ones are the best?
Thanks all for your time!

Mark.

There are more difficult ones, conceptually (3rd, 7th), but even those (3rd, at least) offer moments of glory.

Fourth and Fifth are popular and obvious and good first chocies...

If you already call yourself a fan, you almost can't do wrong from this point on, except perhaps not give it enough time and/or (temporarily) overdosing.

There used to be a survey of Mahler on WETA... the last 8 (of 24) parts of which are also to be found here:

http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2009/12/mahler-survey.html

(will be complete/restored, eventually)

Still, the 3 favorite recordings of that cycle (Over all and specially on SACD / always contentious, such 'favorite/best' lists) are still listed for each symphony.

A list of reviews of Mahler Symphonies on ionarts (both CD and in concert) can be found here: http://ionarts.blogspot.com/2006/08/mahler-reviews-on-ionarts.html

Lots of reading: hardly definitive, but hopefully helpful.

[sheffmark]

Great stuff guys!
Thanks for the advice and links and thanks also for the welcome back madaboutmahler!

Mark.

[Papy Oli]

Has anybody yet found any info on the "Boulez conducts Mahler" due out for release on March 4th ? I have dropped a line to Decca/Universal customer services to see if they will confirm the contents of this release. Will keep you posted if/when i hear back.

[asin]B004NO5HLG[/asin]

[North Star]

Has anybody yet found any info on the "Boulez conducts Mahler" due out for release on March 4th ? I have dropped a line to Decca/Universal customer services to see if they will confirm the contents of this release. Will keep you posted if/when i hear back.

[asin]B004NO5HLG[/asin]

Nothing more than what is on the UK site, Olivier.
One thing is sure; that thing is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.
Obviously everyone wants to see what they reply, if they do!

[Papy Oli]

One thing is sure; that thing is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.

If it is indeed one CD only, that's a bit too expensive to take a random stab on as well....but if it is the full cycle....hmmmm...