Mahler Mania, Rebooted

[kishnevi]

I don't know off the top of my head... but I seem to ... wait, no... yes... both of those performances are of the THREE-part "Klagende Lied".  (Part 1 was suppressed by Mahler, but whereas his last wishes seem to be the overriding argument in matters Sixth Symphony, here they are cast aside and the 3-part version is now the only one performed & recorded.) In any case, Chailly is superior... and the added Wunderhorn (3), Ruecker (5), Wayfarer (4) and Kindertoten-lieder (all 5, that being Mahler's only actual cycle) with Fassbaender are very, very good.

Not half bad is the disc with Masur / Gewandhaus and Suitner / StaKap Berlin on Berlin Classics where Siegfried Lorenz sings the Kindertotenlieder, Wayfarer 1-4, Rueckert, and four Wunderhorn Lieder. And by "not half bad" I mean: Overlooked, different, excellent, cheap.



Mahler
Orchestral Songs
Siegfried Lorenz
K.Masur, O.Suitner
Berlin Classics

My enjoyment of the Chailly is marred by the fact that he uses a boy soprano.  Is that something which Mahler wrote and everyone else ignored, or some artistic decision on the part of Chailly?   
I also have the Thomas recording and the one made by Rattle (it's part of the EMI Complete Mahler box).  I don't like the Rattle for a multitude of reasons--it just sound wrong to my ears at a number of points, so the Thomas is perforce my preferred version.  I can't comment on the lieder included in the Chailly two-for because I have it as part of the DG Complete Mahler box. 

I recently saw a two-for of Haitink's Third on Philips which was filled out by his recording of the two-part Klagende Lied.   Don't know if it's available in any other format.

On a completely unrelated tangent, does anyone have any strong opinions on Inbal's cycle?

[Drasko]

Is there a good collection of all of Mahler's orchestral songs?  I have more symphonies that I know what to do with, but a collection of songs would fill some gaps.

This week's 'Building a Library' on BBC radio 3 was on Des Knaben Wunderhorn.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b011txw4

(starts 30 minutes into program)

[Marc]

[....]
Not half bad is the disc with Masur / Gewandhaus and Suitner / StaKap Berlin on Berlin Classics where Siegfried Lorenz sings the Kindertotenlieder, Wayfarer 1-4, Rueckert, and four Wunderhorn Lieder. And by "not half bad" I mean: Overlooked, different, excellent, cheap.



Mahler
Orchestral Songs
Siegfried Lorenz
K.Masur, O.Suitner
Berlin Classics

This little gem is now available for a laughable € 3,39 at Amazon.de!!

http://www.amazon.de/gp/product/B000JJS7ES/

[jlaurson]

My enjoyment of the Chailly is marred by the fact that he uses a boy soprano.  Is that something which Mahler wrote and everyone else ignored, or some artistic decision on the part of Chailly?   
I also have the Thomas recording and the one made by Rattle (it's part of the EMI Complete Mahler box).  I don't like the Rattle for a multitude of reasons--it just sound wrong to my ears at a number of points, so the Thomas is perforce my preferred version.  I can't comment on the lieder included in the Chailly two-for because I have it as part of the DG Complete Mahler box. 

I recently saw a two-for of Haitink's Third on Philips which was filled out by his recording of the two-part Klagende Lied.   Don't know if it's available in any other format.

On a completely unrelated tangent, does anyone have any strong opinions on Inbal's cycle?

A boy-ALTO, please. I find it much less distracting than Bernstein's boy-soprano in his DG Fourth. Not at all distracting, actually, and with a beautiful voice.

The DKL exists in three versions if you wish: Original 3 movement, Revised 2 movement, and Hybrid Revised 3 movement (the second version with the Waldmaerchen tacked on).
I think I have all but the Boulez-collage (Sony), but can't even remember my memory of DKL/Rattle, for example. Chailly and MTT, I know, are Hybrid-3 Movement versions. Reasons of economy alone suggest the revised version over the original.  Is Nagano the only recording (un)available of the true original version with "Fernorchester"? I haven't got it... unfortunately.

I know that boy-soloists (S & A) were called for in the original... but no longer in the revised version. Chailly includes his boy alto "ad libitum", as indicated in the score... So he follows Mahler along optional paths; others opt not to do so.
It's just a little part in "Es klingt so traurig und doch so schoen"? No... the stanza right after that... Spielmann, lieber Spielmann something-something. [Edit: Right... the boy is the voice of the dead brother as it comes from the flute. One stanzas...  once in the second, once in the third part.]

From WETA: Gustav Mahler – Introduction (1.2)
...There are just a few recordings of this work and of the few there are, fewer still seem currently, or easily, available in the U.S.. Sinopoli's* and Rattle's recordings are available as part of their complete box sets (DG, EMI), Michael Tilson Thomas' 1996 RCA recording is again attainable from San Francisco Symphony media, remastered in the hybrid-SACD format. Haitink's Concertgebouw Third, re-issued, happily comes with the two-movement verison of it. Inbal is hard to come by and Nagano out of print, but at least the excellent Chailly (Decca) is available again. At least that is more than just a few years ago, which is good because Das Klagende Lied is not only a beautiful work (whether in three, or—as revised—two movements), but also echt-Mahler. As such, it might even seem more confident than his First Symphony with its oversized, glued-on tail. In Das Klagende Lied can be discerned the seeds of material that Mahler would later harvest—notably for the Songs of a Wayfarer, but even as late in his career as when writing Das Lied von der Erde. [* Sinopoli's recording has since been made available via the ArkivMusic service]

The Haitink Third & 2-part DKL is excellent in part because of the smoothly flowing Third that it comes with... not a 'stunning' performance, but a wholly gratifying one... working, as Haitink often does, on subtlety. That format is the only way Haitinks DKL is currently available.

You'll be hard pressed to find really strong opinions on the Inbal Cycle... but I can give you my lighthearted opinion of it being one of the best and coherent. His Fourth is among my top three favorites... Seventh and Tenth are excellent.... and none are bad in any way. His problem, if you wish to put it that way, is that there are so many other cycles that, without being better, have other reasons that has them end up chosen over Inbal. Bernstein on Sony, for example, isn't really "better", but hey: it's Bernstein... which adds a flavor Inbal doesn't. And Bernstein DG is so OTT that it makes it special in a way Inbal is not. And Kubelik is the understated classic... not unlike Inbal is... but with the difference that Kubelik is the "classic", and Inbal is not. And Gielen has so many standout performances in his cycle that they make up for the weaknesses (Fourth, for example) and have it recommended over Inbal for being 'more interesting'. And Inbal doesn't have the RCO, so some people will choose Haitink and Chailly over him on that account. And so on and so forth. Doesn't make it a less superb cycle, though. Would choose it over Bertini and Neumann/CzPO and Zinman and Gergiev and whatever else is out there; the sound on DENON was exemplary for its time and still great.

[kishnevi]

A boy-ALTO, please. I find it much less distracting than Bernstein's boy-soprano in his DG Fourth. Not at all distracting, actually, and with a beautiful voice.

DG's track listings say "boy soprano".  Of course we know that track listings and liner notes are never wrong.
(and thanks for the info on DKL)
I may be in a very small minority, but I actually like Bernstein's boy.    Or at least, I don't find it distracting and don't think it mars the performance. 

You'll be hard pressed to find really strong opinions on the Inbal Cycle... but I can give you my lighthearted opinion of it being one of the best and coherent. His Fourth is among my top three favorites... Seventh and Tenth are excellent.... and none are bad in any way. His problem, if you wish to put it that way, is that there are so many other cycles that, without being better, have other reasons that has them end up chosen over Inbal. Bernstein on Sony, for example, isn't really "better", but hey: it's Bernstein... which adds a flavor Inbal doesn't. And Bernstein DG is so OTT that it makes it special in a way Inbal is not. And Kubelik is the understated classic... not unlike Inbal is... but with the difference that Kubelik is the "classic", and Inbal is not. And Gielen has so many standout performances in his cycle that they make up for the weaknesses (Fourth, for example) and have it recommended over Inbal for being 'more interesting'. And Inbal doesn't have the RCO, so some people will choose Haitink and Chailly over him on that account. And so on and so forth. Doesn't make it a less superb cycle, though. Would choose it over Bertini and Neumann/CzPO and Zinman and Gergiev and whatever else is out there; the sound on DENON was exemplary for its time and still great.

Thank you.  Inbal will be the next cycle, then, after the Tennstedt box arrives (that's the new one from EMI with the extra recordings of 5, 6 and 7).

I think, btw, you may be underrating Zinman.  The only installment of his cycle I would call mediocre or worse is the 10th, and that may the fault of the version he uses (Carpenter's).

[ibanezmonster]

Has anyone noticed a strange technical flaw in Abbado's first version of Mahler's Symphony No. 9? I recently bought the 1995 box set, and have become captivated by this version of the 9th with the Vienna Philharmonic.

However, I'm noticing the strangest technical glitch I've ever found on a CD. Instead of being divided into four tracks, one per movement, the 9th Symphony is broken into 31 separate tracks. And on more than one occasion, the volume goes up or down for no apparent reason as one track gives way to the next.

Pretty much describes my burned copy of Karajan's live performance.

[Marc]

[....]
You'll be hard pressed to find really strong opinions on the Inbal Cycle... but I can give you my lighthearted opinion of it being one of the best and coherent. His Fourth is among my top three favorites... Seventh and Tenth are excellent.... and none are bad in any way. His problem, if you wish to put it that way, is that there are so many other cycles that, without being better, have other reasons that has them end up chosen over Inbal. Bernstein on Sony, for example, isn't really "better", but hey: it's Bernstein... which adds a flavor Inbal doesn't. And Bernstein DG is so OTT that it makes it special in a way Inbal is not. And Kubelik is the understated classic... not unlike Inbal is... but with the difference that Kubelik is the "classic", and Inbal is not. And Gielen has so many standout performances in his cycle that they make up for the weaknesses (Fourth, for example) and have it recommended over Inbal for being 'more interesting'. And Inbal doesn't have the RCO, so some people will choose Haitink and Chailly over him on that account. And so on and so forth. Doesn't make it a less superb cycle, though. Would choose it over Bertini and Neumann/CzPO and Zinman and Gergiev and whatever else is out there; the sound on DENON was exemplary for its time and still great.

My memories from Inbal's cycle: very good and natural recording sound.
Highlights: a beautiful 4th (with Helen Donath!), an impressive 5th and a breathtaking choral ending of the 2nd (even though Doris Soffel never convinced me).
And, like all German broadcast orchestras, the Radio Sinfonie Orchester Frankfurt is very good!

Overall cycle: a bit uneven maybe, but hey: which cycle isn't?
(But I wouldn't choose it over Bertini though.)

Bought it some 10 years ago for around 25 euro .... and although I'm struck with flu right now, only that recollection makes me feel better.

[jlaurson]

DG's track listings say "boy soprano".

I think, btw, you may be underrating Zinman.  The only installment of his cycle I would call mediocre or worse is the 10th, and that may the fault of the version he uses (Carpenter's).

Alto all the same. 

I may be underrating Zinman's Mahler... and in fact I've not even yet opened / heard 6, 8, 9, 10 (I like that he went for Carpenter, at least in theory). Among the others, I only thought the 3rd was special. In concert, however, his Sixth recently (Leipzig) was amazing. Very nearly convinced Riccardo Chailly to perform the symphony "A-S" in the future... though I tried to quell that thought immediately with a look of horror on my face and an amateur's passionate plea for "S-A". 

I like the idea of Bernstein's boy soprano... but the execution makes me want to shoot little innocent Seppi. The alto in Chailly's DKL is a different story altogether; a touch of 'boyish insecurity wobble' only at the beginning and then a clear-yet-reedy stable alto voice throughout his bit(s).

[Jay F]

Pretty much describes my burned copy of Karajan's live performance.

Greg - I just discovered that that's exactly my problem. These flaws exist only in the files I ripped to my computer. The discs play fine. I'm listening to them now on headphones, and there's not a single issue. Everything plays fine.

Do you know why this happens on computer files? It's never happened to me before that I know of. I'm using iTunes 10.2.2.12 for Windows, FWIW.

[ibanezmonster]

It probably has something to do with ripping in general, because I used Windows Media Player to rip and burn. You could try googling "ripping causes volume problems" or something like that, and you might be able to find an answer.

[Scarpia]

Greg - I just discovered that that's exactly my problem. These flaws exist only in the files I ripped to my computer. The discs play fine. I'm listening to them now on headphones, and there's not a single issue. Everything plays fine.

Do you know why this happens on computer files? It's never happened to me before that I know of. I'm using iTunes 10.2.2.12 for Windows, FWIW.

I don't use iTunes, but some programs have a "feature" where they automatically adjust the volume of all tracks to a standard level.  Usually this feature can be disabled in some obscure dialog box which it takes 45 minutes to find.

[Jay F]

It probably has something to do with ripping in general, because I used Windows Media Player to rip and burn. You could try googling "ripping causes volume problems" or something like that, and you might be able to find an answer.

I don't use iTunes, but some programs have a "feature" where they automatically adjust the volume of all tracks to a standard level.  Usually this feature can be disabled in some obscure dialog box which it takes 45 minutes to find.

Exactly. I found out I had a box checked in iTunes called Soundcheck, and that's what was causing the problem. To find it, go to Edit > Preferences > Playback > Soundcheck. Uncheck the box, and your music plays like the CD you ripped it from.

What was the point of breaking movements into all these smaller files? It's something I used to see it on some of my original CDs, but it went away eventually. That's what set Soundcheck off, that and the dynamic range in Mahler symphonies.

Thanks to everyone who helped me out with this. I had never heard such a thing before.

[Scarpia]

What was the point of breaking movements into all these smaller files? It's something I used to see it on some of my original CDs, but it went away eventually. That's what set Soundcheck off, that and the dynamic range in Mahler symphonies.

I like the extra breaks in very long movements.  One of my first CDs was Karajan's Alpine Symphony, which had a single ~60 minute track.  Very annoying.  Later they reissued it with each of Strauss's cue points as a separate track, although the music remained continuous.  Even if you want to listen to the thing straight through, it is helpful to be able to look at the CD player and see where you are in Strauss's scheme.

[kishnevi]

I may be underrating Zinman's Mahler... and in fact I've not even yet opened / heard 6, 8, 9, 10 (I like that he went for Carpenter, at least in theory). Among the others, I only thought the 3rd was special. In concert, however, his Sixth recently (Leipzig) was amazing. Very nearly convinced Riccardo Chailly to perform the symphony "A-S" in the future... though I tried to quell that thought immediately with a look of horror on my face and an amateur's passionate plea for "S-A". 

I tend to think that Zinman's 3rd is the best of his cycle, but 9 gives it a very good run for the money.   No,  change that to 9 is the best  of the cycle, and 3 gives it a run for the money.  Chiefly because the last movement is one of the best performances I've heard.   I thought 6 was good, but not as good as others I've heard.  Of course, that may simply mean the performance you heard was better than the one actually recorded.    As for 8--well, it's fine enough but Ozawa need not be afraid that you've found someone to replace him in your heart.    As for 10--not sure if I don't like it because I'm simply unfamiliar with Carpenter's version or whether it's because Carpenter's version is not as good as the ones I'm familiar with (Cooke and derivatives thereof, and the Naxos recording of the Wheeler version).


Meanwhile,  the Amazon cat dragged in two plump Mahler goodies today for me:  the Wunderlich/Fischer Dieskau/Krips recording of DLvdE just released on DG, and the Tennstedt complete recordings set EMI just issued.    Someone speculated that the extra recordings of 5-7 in that box were with the BBC Symphony.  They're not; they all with the LPO,  live performances for the second cycle he didn't live to complete  Performance dates in order are
5-13 Dec 1988 [the same recording is part of EMI's Complete Mahler box] 6-4 & 7 Nov 1991  7-14/15 May 1993.  The rest of the box is the studio cycle, including DLvdE.

The Fritz and Dietrich show is vocally very good--first listen makes me think both do better here than on their more familiar recordings with Ludwig/Klemperer and King/Bernstein.  Since it's a live recording, there's some audience noise and what I think are some flubs in the horns and winds at one or two points.     The only real flaw is that the recording is mono--or else not very good stereo--the singers are recorded close but the orchestra often sounds rather flat and distant.  The booklet doesn't say which.   The performance itself was on 14 June 1964--ha! 47 years ago from tomorrow (or today by the time you probably read this).

[bhodges]

OK, this got my attention: just found out that Gustavo Dudamel will conduct the Mahler Eighth next February in Los Angeles, at the Shrine Auditorium. (FYI, the place seats 6,300 people.)

The Los Angeles Philharmonic Orchestra will be combined with the Simón Bolívar Symphony Symphony Orchestra of Venezuela - vocal soloists TBD - plus some fifteen choirs, for a total of over 1,000 people onstage.

http://www.laphil.com/tickets/performance-detail.cfm?id=4683

--Bruce

[knight66]

I wonder how it will go bringing so many choirs together. I have done it when combined with other choruses; BBC SO Chorus, Choir of Philadelphia Orchestra on another occasion; each time the sound was less incisive than if a single choir that is used to one another was involved. Different choirs respond differently depending who trained them.

But I am sure it will be exciting. I imagine there will be a DVD.

Mike

[bhodges]

I wonder how it will go bringing so many choirs together. I have done it when combined with other choruses; BBC SO Chorus, Choir of Philadelphia Orchestra on another occasion; each time the sound was less incisive than if a single choir that is used to one another was involved. Different choirs respond differently depending who trained them.

But I am sure it will be exciting. I imagine there will be a DVD.

Mike

Yes, quite true: the coordination of all those groups could be dicey. But given the venue (photos on the website below) it's certain to be an event. And I hope they film it.

http://www.shrineauditorium.com/index.html

--Bruce

[Scarpia]

I hope they distribute complementary aspirin tablets before the concert.   

[knight66]

It does look like an impressive venue. With this piece, there are no good performances; it is either terrific or an also ran. Some of the best ones I have been in are not necessairly the ones one would assume would be best.

Mike

[Scarpia]

It does look like an impressive venue. With this piece, there are no good performances; it is either terrific or an also ran. Some of the best ones I have been in are not necessairly the ones one would assume would be best.

You are probably very familiar with it, it is the place they do the Academy Awards, Oscars, various Beauty Pagents, etc.  I don't know if the acoustics are any good.