Mahler - Symphony No 1 - A Walkthrough

[DavidRoss]

Mahler was right to drop the program.  Useful, perhaps, in structuring a piece during creation, but otherwise a useless impediment to appreciation.

[Rod Corkin]

It needed a better home, that's for sure, which is why it's been published here.

You wound me M10th, after all the nice things I have said about this essay. 

And still you are not satisfied with the response even here, in this better home, as I could have told you. I recommend you search out a dedicated Mahler forum if you want more critical feedback. 

So we will not be seeing your next installment at the upper chamber?

[AnthonyAthletic]

It has been said many times before...the Kubelik studio recordings (and most of the rest, some if them better) are pure poetry.  Kubelik brings an aesthetic lyricism to Mahler which cannot be found elsewhere, and he's in my top three Mahlerians!  When it comes to the tenth adagio, Kubelik is STILL my man.

Kubelik, I have heard often described as 'safe' Mahler.  Which I totally disagree, his approach to Mahler is for me pretty near the finished article 'as I like to hear Mahler' personally.

And his live recordings are every bit as natural and delightful, they show me how one conductor can find Mahler every bit a challenge second time around without losing any drive.

[knight66]

Rod, thank you, ultimately I got the allusion.

I do hope I am not derailing the thread as I have moved away from discussion of the piece itself onto discussion of performances. I will have to have a think if there is anything I can contribute about the symphony.

Mike

[knight66]

Tony, I bought the Kubelik DG set on LP when I was about 17. I think he was too deep as an interpreter for me and I was more attracted to the flashy interpretations. It has taken me a lot of years to begin to really appreciate how musical his fix on the music is.

When I was listening to the Gergiev 1st I was thinking I would compare the running time as the first movement is so obviously fast. Of course there are many occasions when speed tells us very little, but excessive speed is crippling.

Mike

[mahler10th]

"I did post this on 'the' other forum ("the upper chamber") FIRST"
Yes, that is true, I have said that so as not to mislead anyone that this is completely exclusive.
A dedicated Mahler forum is out of the question for me, because I am not exclusively a Mahler lover, nor do I want to hear from people who like only Mahler.  I am (and always have been) more a lover of Sibelius, and I asusme the Mahler guise only because his tenth (adagio) played by Kubelik is the ONLY PIECE OF CLASSICAL MUSIC WHICH HAS MADE ME SHED TEARS.  I also do much of other composers.

Rod: "And still you are not satisfied with the response even here, in this better place, as I could have told you..."
Rod, that is daft, my post was an appreciation and a shocking display of my growing big head because this Mahler walkthrough has been met so well here by such well informed people.

Rod: "So we will not be seeing your next installment at the upper chamber?"  
There is no exclusivity, but I'll put it here first this time.

[Harry]

You wound me M10th, after all the nice things I have said about this essay. 

Good for you to feel, what you did to others!

[Rod Corkin]

Good for you to feel, what you did to others!

You wound yourself Harry. 

[knight66]

Enough please. No more with the off topic remarks, I am intent this thread not be derailed. I am off out for the evening now....so I am trusting you....but I will be back.

Mike

[Rod Corkin]

Rod: "And still you are not satisfied with the response even here, in this better place, as I could have told you..."
Rod, that is daft, my post was an appreciation and a shocking display of my growing big head because this Mahler walkthrough has been met so well here by such well informed people.

We'll I've looked though all the responses so far and apart from a few 'good's and 'thankyou's there is only one respondent who has made an in any way technical response, on one occasion. I'd say so far you should still be expecting MUCH more! Certainly there is little or no more substance here so far than in your thread at CMM. I asked you to post a movement or two at my site for some common frame of reference for debate but it seems you have abandoned your own topic there. The ways of men are strange indeed! 

[Rod Corkin]

Rod: "So we will not be seeing your next installment at the upper chamber?" 
There is no exclusivity, but I'll put it here first this time.

Well I can't say I'm too concerned with exclusivity, you can send us your cast-offs from now on M. I must say you seem to attach a certain pride to this publication. You behaviour has changed somewhat because of it.

[bhodges]

So returning to the Mahler 1, it is one of my favorite works, and thank you, mahler 10, for posting your thoughts on it.  I find it an audacious symphony, one that uses a rather traditional structure (i.e., four movements) but finds countless new ways to surprise listeners.  And it certainly foreshadows his even more audacious creations to come.

I'd be interested to hear Gergiev's take on it.  He does the Sixth quite well (IMHO) but somehow I could imagine the springlike, pastoral elements of the First eluding him.  And the First isn't nearly as neurotic, violent or (seemingly) chaotic as some of its successors. 

--Bruce

[mahler10th]

Well I can't say I'm too concerned with exclusivity, you can send us your cast-offs from now on M. I must say you seem to attach a certain pride to this publication. You behaviour has changed somewhat because of it.

Well, that's a right strange response, I must say!  I have no pride in it oher than it has been well met by some here who may know infinitely more than I do on the subject.  I am sorry you choose to see my happiness as pride and that I have changed.  As someone once said to me on another subject, you are talking hair singeing nonsense with this.
Your choice words 'cast-offs' is equally hair singeing.  I am casting nothing off.  I'm merely distributing information as I see it and wondering what kind of feedback will result.  This inspires me to go further with the format you inspired me with, and of that, I am proud.

[mahler10th]

So returning to the Mahler 1, it is one of my favorite works, and thank you, mahler 10, for posting your thoughts on it.  I find it an audacious symphony, one that uses a rather traditional structure (i.e., four movements) but finds countless new ways to surprise listeners.  And it certainly foreshadows his even more audacious creations to come.

I'd be interested to hear Gergiev's take on it.  He does the Sixth quite well (IMHO) but somehow I could imagine the springlike, pastoral elements of the First eluding him.  And the First isn't nearly as neurotic, violent or (seemingly) chaotic as some of its successors. 

--Bruce

Yes Bruce, it is much a multi faceted symphony and debate goes on about its meaning.  It's four movement structure is also mysterious, as it was initially composed with five.  We can only wonder what made him take that Blumine movement out - if no-ones heard it, I'll post it on Box.net to be heard, let me know. 
My problem with Gergiev and his Mahler first is that as has already been said, it is as fast as hell, and somehow out of context, and even in the sixth Gergiev has not really understood the core of Mahlers voice, and while I'd admit it is well played (the sixth, that is) I do not feel it is well conveyed in its purpose.
I'll have to listen to it again to figure out why this may be so as I may be horribly wrong, but I don't think so.

Mahler 1 is also one of my favourite works Bruce, moreso because it's a real riddle unto itself. 

[bhodges]

Just to be a little clearer, I haven't heard Gergiev's recording of the Sixth; he did it live with the New York Philharmonic awhile back, and it was terrific (IMHO).  Not "better than" other versions, necessarily (and these days there are a lot of them) but it stood up well.  But I'd like to hear his recording. 

And if he's taking the First too fast, that would seem to me to be a mistake, since there is much to savor in that piece.  I think the first movement, in particular, has many "stop and smell the roses" moments, and if they are a bit slower, it makes the cataclysmic parts even more effective.  I like lots of First's, but (just to cite a slower one) I do like Chailly's rather leisurely tempi here.  For some he's too slow, but I think he makes his choices work, similarly to his generally slower versions of some of the other Mahler symphonies.

PS, last time I heard this was just a few weeks ago with Haitink and Chicago at Carnegie Hall--excellent. 

--Bruce

[Rod Corkin]

Fair enough. Ironically by coincidence someone has taken up your topic at 'the place that is not better', I hope you will find time to respond to it! Patience is a virtue in this game. Sooner or later someone usually comes along with something to say.

[M forever]

Gergiev's recording of the Sixth; he did it live with the New York Philharmonic awhile back

Did he do the piece with them, or they with him, if you know what I mean?

and it was terrific (IMHO)

Could you point me to a critical review of a concert you went to? I don't recall ever having read anything but "terrific", "outstanding", "marvelous", "excellent". At some point, these words then lose meaning.

[(poco) Sforzando]

I would like to know what the OP (or anyone else) has to say about the very last two notes of the symphony - that unison octave drop D to D. I have my own theory about its role in the composition, which I'll post a little later when I'm fully awake. But how about performance? Should the last two notes be taken strictly in tempo (which accelerates towards the end, to a greater or lesser degree depending on the conductor), or should there be a slight stentando? Should the downbeat receive a stronger accent than the second beat (a trochee), or should both notes receive more or less equal accents (a spondee)? I think I've heard it all these ways.

[mahler10th]

I would like to know what the OP (or anyone else) has to say about the very last two notes of the symphony - that unison octave drop D to D. I have my own theory about its role in the composition, which I'll post a little later when I'm fully awake. But how about performance? Should the last two notes be taken strictly in tempo (which accelerates towards the end, to a greater or lesser degree depending on the conductor), or should there be a slight stentando? Should the downbeat receive a stronger accent than the second beat (a trochee), or should both notes receive more or less equal accents (a spondee)? I think I've heard it all these ways.

Not keen on the 'slight stendando' approach, the end of the fourth movement should be filled with hope and optimism.  Equal accents are ok, but sometimes are out of proportion with what has gone before.  I like the trochee aproach because it seems to give it a more rounded (but still sudden) finish.

[Harry]

I have the 1,2,3 conducted by Abbado, and find his interpretation highly approachable, and attention to details, that is at times phenomenal. However Tennstedt and Neuman, and also Inbal have their say in the matter, so I find them all enjoyable. Since Kubelik is highly praised, this set will be the next on my list.