Best version of Mahler's Symphony No. 2: Resurrection

Post by c***@gmail.com
I just heard Mahler's Resurrection on internet radio and it is a
masterpiece! I would like to buy a recording of it but don't know
which one to purchase. What are your thoughts?
Please provide UPC or ASIN numbers, if possible, so as to avoid any
confusion. Thank you!

Personally I'm a big fan of Klemperer in this one.

ASIN: B00004R8TO

http://www.amazon.com/Mahler-Symphony-Klemperer-Philharmonia-Orchestra/dp/B00004R8TO/sr=1-1/qid=1160007591/ref=sr_1_1/102-1527088-1306558?ie=UTF8&s=music

Todd Schurk

2006-10-05 00:36:41 UTC

Post by Paul Ilechko

Personally I'm a big fan of Klemperer in this one.
ASIN: B00004R8TO
http://www.amazon.com/Mahler-Symphony-Klemperer-Philharmonia-Orchestra/dp/B00004R8TO/sr=1-1/qid=1160007591/ref=sr_1_1/1

02-1527088-1306558?ie=UTF8&s=music

I agree with the Klemperer recomendation.

makropulos

2006-10-05 00:36:49 UTC

Agree enthusiastically about Klemperer - there are some excellent
others (Abbado/Lucerne Festival being the most recent), but Klemperer
superb in so many ways. And it sounds wonderful in its latest
remastering.

Post by Paul Ilechko

Personally I'm a big fan of Klemperer in this one.
ASIN: B00004R8TO
http://www.amazon.com/Mahler-Symphony-Klemperer-Philharmonia-Orchestra/dp/B00004R8TO/sr=1-1/qid=1160007591/ref=sr_1_1/102-1527088-1306558?ie=UTF8&s=music

m***@comcast.net

2006-10-05 01:22:02 UTC

Post by makropulos
Agree enthusiastically about Klemperer - there are some excellent
others (Abbado/Lucerne Festival being the most recent), but Klemperer
superb in so many ways. And it sounds wonderful in its latest
remastering.

For a first Resurrection, I wouldn't recommend the comparatively
straight-laced Klemperer as a first choice, but
rather either the Sony or DG Bernstein, Scherchen, Kubelik on Audite,
or even Stokowski on BBC (the transfer of
which I haven't heard, owning the earlier M&A).

Marc Perman

J***@msn.com

2006-10-05 01:31:38 UTC

It's all been said before here: commercially my favorite it the
Scherchen (but try to find it on lp with a black and red stereo label
pressing/wise); Walter NY Phil in stereo; Bernstein NY phil (his first
recording); Stoky (albeit the Victor has a cut finale); Barbirolli:
here are some of my Mahler holdings:
Symphony No. 2 in c minor, "Resurrection" (1887-1894):
I. Allegro maestoso
II. Ländler: Andante moderato
III. Scherzo: In ruhig fliessender Bewegung
IV. "Urlicht" (Sehr feierlich, aber schlicht)
V. Im Tempo des Scherzo's - Wild herausfahrend
John Barbirolli, South German Radio Symphony; Donnath, Finnila; South
German Chorus (live broadcast April 1970, stereo) CM 720
Leonard Bernstein, New York Phil; Collegiate Chorale (Abraham Kaplan,
director); Jennie Tourel, mezzo-soprano; Lee Venora, soprano. cor
COLUMBIA M2Q 604 (stereo, 7½ speed)
Leonard Bernstein, New York Phil; Westminster Choir (Joseph
Flummerfelt, chorus master); Barbara Hendricks, soprano; Christa
Ludwig, contralto (rec New York City April, 1987; 24:53; 12:04; 11:24;
6:18; 39:58) 2 cass Deutsche Grammophon 423 395-4 (digital stereo)
Leonard Bernstein, New York Philharmonic; Curtin, Resnik, Rutgers
Chorus (live broadcast Feb 20, 1960) CM 406, CM 407
Eliahu Inbal, Frankfurt Radio Sym Orch; Chorus of Nordeutscher
Rundfunk, Hamburg (chorus master: Werner Hagen); Helen Donath,
sorprano; Doris Soffel, alto (rec Frankfurt: March 28/29, 1985; 22:41;
11:13; 11:25; 5:50; 33:53) 2 cd DENON 60C37-7603 4 (stereo, DDD)
Otto Klemperer, Philharmonia Orch and Chorus (chorus m., Wilhelm Pitz);
Elisabeth Schwarzkopf, soprano; Hilde Rossl-Majdan, mezzo-soprano (rec.
ca 1963; 18:58; 10:29; 11:44; 19:05+19:08 {4th and 5th mvts}). cor
Angel ZB 3634 (stereo, 7½ speed)
Hermann Scherchen, Vienna State Opera Orchestra; Mimi Coertse, soprano;
Lucretia West, alto; Vienna Academy Chorus (24:45; 11:45; 12:23; 6:48;
37:29; rec June 1958) 2cd MCA CLASSICS MCAD2-9833 (AAD)
Leopold Stokowski, American Symphony Orchestra (Janette Moody, Louise
Parker; stereo, in house, April 6, 1971) BM 17
Leopold Stokowski, American Symphony Orchestra; Janette Moody, Louise
Parker; (stereo, in house 4/4/71 and 4/6/71) CM 460 (2nd source)
Leopold Stokowski, London Symphony Orchestra; Elizabeth Harwood; Janet
Baker; BBC Chorus; BBC Choral Society - live broadcast, 1963) CM 623
Leopold Stokowski, no orchestra listed; "Rae Woodland", Janet Baker
(rec 1963) Private recording PR-19N
Leopold Stokowski, Philadelphia Orchestra; Veronica Tyler, Lucia Godoy;
Singing City Choir (in house Nov 7, 1967) CM 585, CM 586
Leopold Stokowski, Philadelphia Orchestra; Veronica Tyler, Lucia Godoy,
Singing City Choir (in house Nov 7, 1967) CM 582 (2nd source)
Leopold Stokowski, Philadelphia Orchestra; Veronica Tyler, Lucia Godoy,
Singing City Choir (in house Nov 7, 1967) CM 338 (3rd source)
don't have the Sinopoli but would like to get his complete Mahler if I
find it cheap enough!
Hauser

j***@aol.com

2006-10-05 02:09:13 UTC

Post by J***@msn.com

It's all been said before here: commercially my favorite it the
Scherchen (but try to find it on lp with a black and red stereo label
pressing/wise); Walter NY Phil in stereo; Bernstein NY phil (his first
I. Allegro maestoso
II. Ländler: Andante moderato
III. Scherzo: In ruhig fliessender Bewegung
IV. "Urlicht" (Sehr feierlich, aber schlicht)
V. Im Tempo des Scherzo's - Wild herausfahrend
John Barbirolli, South German Radio Symphony; Donnath, Finnila; South
German Chorus (live broadcast April 1970, stereo) CM 720
Leonard Bernstein, New York Phil; Collegiate Chorale (Abraham Kaplan,
director); Jennie Tourel, mezzo-soprano; Lee Venora, soprano. cor
COLUMBIA M2Q 604 (stereo, 7½ speed)
Leonard Bernstein, New York Phil; Westminster Choir (Joseph
Flummerfelt, chorus master); Barbara Hendricks, soprano; Christa
Ludwig, contralto (rec New York City April, 1987; 24:53; 12:04; 11:24;
6:18; 39:58) 2 cass Deutsche Grammophon 423 395-4 (digital stereo)
Leonard Bernstein, New York Philharmonic; Curtin, Resnik, Rutgers
Chorus (live broadcast Feb 20, 1960) CM 406, CM 407
Eliahu Inbal, Frankfurt Radio Sym Orch; Chorus of Nordeutscher
Rundfunk, Hamburg (chorus master: Werner Hagen); Helen Donath,
sorprano; Doris Soffel, alto (rec Frankfurt: March 28/29, 1985; 22:41;
11:13; 11:25; 5:50; 33:53) 2 cd DENON 60C37-7603 4 (stereo, DDD)
Otto Klemperer, Philharmonia Orch and Chorus (chorus m., Wilhelm Pitz);
Elisabeth Schwarzkopf, soprano; Hilde Rossl-Majdan, mezzo-soprano (rec.
ca 1963; 18:58; 10:29; 11:44; 19:05+19:08 {4th and 5th mvts}). cor
Angel ZB 3634 (stereo, 7½ speed)
Hermann Scherchen, Vienna State Opera Orchestra; Mimi Coertse, soprano;
Lucretia West, alto; Vienna Academy Chorus (24:45; 11:45; 12:23; 6:48;
37:29; rec June 1958) 2cd MCA CLASSICS MCAD2-9833 (AAD)
Leopold Stokowski, American Symphony Orchestra (Janette Moody, Louise
Parker; stereo, in house, April 6, 1971) BM 17
Leopold Stokowski, American Symphony Orchestra; Janette Moody, Louise
Parker; (stereo, in house 4/4/71 and 4/6/71) CM 460 (2nd source)
Leopold Stokowski, London Symphony Orchestra; Elizabeth Harwood; Janet
Baker; BBC Chorus; BBC Choral Society - live broadcast, 1963) CM 623
Leopold Stokowski, no orchestra listed; "Rae Woodland", Janet Baker
(rec 1963) Private recording PR-19N
Leopold Stokowski, Philadelphia Orchestra; Veronica Tyler, Lucia Godoy;
Singing City Choir (in house Nov 7, 1967) CM 585, CM 586
Leopold Stokowski, Philadelphia Orchestra; Veronica Tyler, Lucia Godoy,
Singing City Choir (in house Nov 7, 1967) CM 582 (2nd source)
Leopold Stokowski, Philadelphia Orchestra; Veronica Tyler, Lucia Godoy,
Singing City Choir (in house Nov 7, 1967) CM 338 (3rd source)
don't have the Sinopoli but would like to get his complete Mahler if I
find it cheap enough!
Hauser

John, do you type stuff like this in ever time because you think it
will help the original poster, or because it just happens to be in a
database that you cut and paste? There's always so much work involved
in giving out so much detail...

--Jeff

p***@yahoo.com

2006-10-05 01:58:35 UTC

For a first Resurrection, I wouldn't recommend the comparatively
straight-laced Klemperer as a first choice, but
rather either the Sony or DG Bernstein, Scherchen...
Marc Perman

I agree with all those; the first Bernstein NY recording on Sony being
my top choice.

Barry

Bob Harper

2006-10-05 02:12:10 UTC

For a first Resurrection, I wouldn't recommend the comparatively
straight-laced Klemperer as a first choice, but
rather either the Sony or DG Bernstein, Scherchen...
Marc Perman

I agree with all those; the first Bernstein NY recording on Sony being
my top choice.
Barry

Agreed. As an introduction to the work, and to Bernstein's way with
Mahler it can't be beat.

Bob Harper

Raymond Hall

2006-10-05 04:25:25 UTC

For a first Resurrection, I wouldn't recommend the comparatively
straight-laced Klemperer as a first choice, but
rather either the Sony or DG Bernstein, Scherchen...
Marc Perman

I agree with all those; the first Bernstein NY recording on Sony being
my top choice.
Barry

Agreed. As an introduction to the work, and to Bernstein's way with Mahler
it can't be beat.

Also agreed. Lenny is far better than the much touted Mehta recording (a
reading for all seasons and weathers). Klemperer is not bad, but the fact
is, that he doesn't really maintain the intensity of the first movement,
which Klemp does very well indeed.

Ray H
Taree, NSW

j***@aol.com

2006-10-05 05:35:46 UTC

For a first Resurrection, I wouldn't recommend the comparatively
straight-laced Klemperer as a first choice, but
rather either the Sony or DG Bernstein, Scherchen...
Marc Perman

I agree with all those; the first Bernstein NY recording on Sony being
my top choice.
Barry

Agreed. As an introduction to the work, and to Bernstein's way with Mahler
it can't be beat.

?? Say that again slowly? Do you think Klemp does or doesn't maintain
intensity in the first movement? I say he does, but I didn't hear it
that way at first and am not sure everybody would.

--Jef

Raymond Hall

2006-10-05 06:26:54 UTC

For a first Resurrection, I wouldn't recommend the comparatively
straight-laced Klemperer as a first choice, but
rather either the Sony or DG Bernstein, Scherchen...
Marc Perman

I agree with all those; the first Bernstein NY recording on Sony being
my top choice.
Barry

Agreed. As an introduction to the work, and to Bernstein's way with Mahler
it can't be beat.

?? Say that again slowly? Do you think Klemp does or doesn't maintain
intensity in the first movement? I say he does, but I didn't hear it
that way at first and am not sure everybody would.

Sorry if I am misunderstood. But Klemp's treading intensity of the first
movement promises so much, that for me, after long acquaintance with the
recording, the rest of the work seems slightly anti-climactic to be honest,
and sags in places. In short, I agree fully with your opinion regarding the
first movement. Not my favourite Mahler symphony actually, but have come to
admire Bernstein (Sony) much more, and also Kubelik on DG. I have the Mehta
as well, and to be frank, find it nothing much above the ordinary for me.

Ray H
Taree, NSW

j***@aol.com

2006-10-05 02:07:55 UTC

I agree basically. Klemperer (there are many versions of his, of
course) is good--in some cases great--but for this symphony go with
great sound and a great performance. Kubelik on Audite is a good
choice, even if the sound is not totally top-notch, it is fine.

Very good choices include Sinopoli, Bernstein, and Kaplan on DG.
Gielen, on Hanssler, is a superb choice too, as are Abbado/Chicago and
Abbado/Lucerne, both on DG, Rattle on EMI is quite nice too, actually,
and so are Bertini on EMI and Litton on Delos and Mehta on
London/Decca. MTT/SFS is very good, and so is and... you know, maybe
instead of spouting off the entire list of excellent Mahler 2
recordings, perhaps the original poster could tell us which one he
heard on the radio and why he liked it.

--Jeff

--Jeff

Todd Schurk

2006-10-05 02:32:14 UTC

I agree basically. Klemperer (there are many versions of his, of
course) is good--in some cases great--but for this symphony go with
great sound and a great performance. Kubelik on Audite is a good
choice, even if the sound is not totally top-notch, it is fine.
Very good choices include Sinopoli, Bernstein, and Kaplan on DG.
Gielen, on Hanssler, is a superb choice too, as are Abbado/Chicago and
Abbado/Lucerne, both on DG, Rattle on EMI is quite nice too, actually,
and so are Bertini on EMI and Litton on Delos and Mehta on
London/Decca. MTT/SFS is very good, and so is and... you know, maybe
instead of spouting off the entire list of excellent Mahler 2
recordings, perhaps the original poster could tell us which one he
heard on the radio and why he liked it.
--Jeff
--Jeff

I think the Klemperer is a great performance in great sound. There are
other great ones yes. But Klemp is as special and for me more so than
any other.

j***@aol.com

2006-10-05 05:12:16 UTC

Post by Todd Schurk

I agree basically. Klemperer (there are many versions of his, of
course) is good--in some cases great--but for this symphony go with
great sound and a great performance. Kubelik on Audite is a good
choice, even if the sound is not totally top-notch, it is fine.
Very good choices include Sinopoli, Bernstein, and Kaplan on DG.
Gielen, on Hanssler, is a superb choice too, as are Abbado/Chicago and
Abbado/Lucerne, both on DG, Rattle on EMI is quite nice too, actually,
and so are Bertini on EMI and Litton on Delos and Mehta on
London/Decca. MTT/SFS is very good, and so is and... you know, maybe
instead of spouting off the entire list of excellent Mahler 2
recordings, perhaps the original poster could tell us which one he
heard on the radio and why he liked it.
--Jeff
--Jeff

I think the Klemperer is a great performance in great sound. There are
other great ones yes. But Klemp is as special and for me more so than
any other.

I agree Klemperer is special, but when I think of Klemperer the one I
like the best is the Concertgebouw Mahler 2, and that is definitely not
in great sound. I don't think his best sounding ones are quite as good,
but the live one on EMI is a reasonable compromise. It took me a long
to time to grow to like the studio recording on EMI, so I don't
consider it a "sure thing" as a recommendation for a first purchase of
the piece.

--Jeff

Paul Ilechko

2006-10-05 02:53:08 UTC

Post by j***@aol.com
Very good choices include Sinopoli, Bernstein, and Kaplan on DG.
Gielen, on Hanssler, is a superb choice too, as are Abbado/Chicago and
Abbado/Lucerne, both on DG, Rattle on EMI is quite nice too, actually,
and so are Bertini on EMI and Litton on Delos and Mehta on
London/Decca. MTT/SFS is very good, and so is and...

Did you really like Litton? I was totally underwhelmed by that
recording, although I have to admit it was better than his Carpenter 10th.

j***@aol.com

2006-10-05 05:14:38 UTC

Post by Paul Ilechko

Did you really like Litton? I was totally underwhelmed by that
recording, although I have to admit it was better than his Carpenter 10th.

I think it is underwhelming if you're looking for some sort of special,
unusual touch or remarkable insights. Instead, it's just really well
recorded, really well played, and very nicely conducted. It's a good
first Mahler 2, in my opinion. Underrated in the way that much of
Litton's work is underrated. I keep thinking he's the Ormandy of our
times. People take for granted that he delivers good playing and
genuine feeling for his repertoire without bowling anyone over with his
ego or his intellect.

--Jeff

c***@gmail.com

2006-10-05 14:00:54 UTC

In regard to which version of the Mahler I heard, I'm not sure who
conducted it, but it was played by the North Carolina Symphony
Orchestra. I heard it on theclassicalstation.org (which is based out
of North Carolina).

There is no particular reason why I liked it - I just liked it! I
enjoy emotion in classical music and am less concerned with tempi as I
am with how the emotion is drawn out of the music. Additionally, sound
quality is very important to me and I want to be able to feel the force
of the music, as though I would be sitting in a concert hall.

Lastly, I am a law student and so I'm on a budget - the Klemperer seems
to be the chepest but I'm seeing some dissent to that recommendation.

Thanks for your input; I look forward to your responses.

I agree basically. Klemperer (there are many versions of his, of
course) is good--in some cases great--but for this symphony go with
great sound and a great performance. Kubelik on Audite is a good
choice, even if the sound is not totally top-notch, it is fine.
Very good choices include Sinopoli, Bernstein, and Kaplan on DG.
Gielen, on Hanssler, is a superb choice too, as are Abbado/Chicago and
Abbado/Lucerne, both on DG, Rattle on EMI is quite nice too, actually,
and so are Bertini on EMI and Litton on Delos and Mehta on
London/Decca. MTT/SFS is very good, and so is and... you know, maybe
instead of spouting off the entire list of excellent Mahler 2
recordings, perhaps the original poster could tell us which one he
heard on the radio and why he liked it.
--Jeff
--Jeff

Paul Ilechko

2006-10-05 14:22:29 UTC

Post by c***@gmail.com
Lastly, I am a law student and so I'm on a budget - the Klemperer seems
to be the cheapest but I'm seeing some dissent to that recommendation.

There is absolutely no chance of a unanimous response on this n.g. !

2006-10-05 15:19:42 UTC

Post by c***@gmail.com
In regard to which version of the Mahler I heard, I'm not sure who
conducted it, but it was played by the North Carolina Symphony
Orchestra. I heard it on theclassicalstation.org (which is based out
of North Carolina).
There is no particular reason why I liked it - I just liked it! I
enjoy emotion in classical music and am less concerned with tempi as I
am with how the emotion is drawn out of the music. Additionally, sound
quality is very important to me and I want to be able to feel the force
of the music, as though I would be sitting in a concert hall.

Don't we all!

However, as you listen more you'll find yourself hunting for the best
performance, regardless of the sound. A great performance in bad sound
is more listenable than a terrible performance in great sound.

Post by c***@gmail.com
Lastly, I am a law student and so I'm on a budget - the Klemperer seems
to be the chepest but I'm seeing some dissent to that recommendation.

There is no holy grail of Mahler 2nds. The reason that there are so
many available is that Mahler lends his symphonies to a host of
different expressions, and you'll probably end up with at least a few
different recordings.

There's nothing wrong with the Klemperer. It's the first one I heard.

-Owen

j***@aol.com

2006-10-05 15:49:48 UTC

Thanks for the extra info. I'm sorry I missed that
broadcast...hopefully I'll catch it on re-broadast. I couldn't find any
other stations that carry it this week.

I read the review of the concert from North Carolina Classical Voice.
Unfortunately it didn't give much information (except that some
annoying photographer hired by management was snapping pictures in the
hall--a terrible no-no).

The few things I did learn were: 1, the strings were not augmented, and
2 the reviewer liked Grant Llewelyn's "pacing", which seemed to imply
he was probably not in a hurry, especially because the reviewer also
praised the feeling of "zeroing in on every note".

With these minimal remarks in hand, I'm a little less hesitant to
recommend Klemperer's Bavarian Radio performance on EMI, with Janet
Baker. I still think the Philharmonia recording is a little dangerous,
though it might be just fine and the balances are probably wind-heavy
enough to be a reasonable similarity to what you heard. I also think
the Gielen recording ($10 at broinc.com; fill out the order with some
other Mahler symphonies) is a good choice--he is also somewhat
deliberate and analytical in terms of balances and pacing.

But again, there are many performances that will be just fine, and the
Kaplan/Vienna Phil, on DG (which is on one disc, so it's not all that
expensive on Amazon's Z-shops), is a great choice for sound and
performance. I have a friend who loves this music yet had only the
Bernstein on Sony, finally decided to get another and chose the Kaplan,
and was simply blown away by how fun it was to listen to this work in
great sound with such a well-thought-out interpretation. (That takes
nothing away from the pleasure you'd get from Bernstein, by the way.)
No one else has mentioned Kaplan, which gives you an idea of how many
possible choices you have here. I know someone who has heard at least
60 recordings of the work and enjoyed every one of them for one reason
or another--admittedly though, not all of those would be in the best
sound.

--Jeff

Cory

2006-10-05 17:47:29 UTC

Thank you all for your recommendations.

I'm going to just go to Borders and check out what they have for sale
and keep all of your thoughts in mind. I'll probably end up with the
Kemplerer, but from what I hear, it's hard to miss the target with such
a great work that is Resurrection.

Thanks for the extra info. I'm sorry I missed that
broadcast...hopefully I'll catch it on re-broadast. I couldn't find any
other stations that carry it this week.
I read the review of the concert from North Carolina Classical Voice.
Unfortunately it didn't give much information (except that some
annoying photographer hired by management was snapping pictures in the
hall--a terrible no-no).
The few things I did learn were: 1, the strings were not augmented, and
2 the reviewer liked Grant Llewelyn's "pacing", which seemed to imply
he was probably not in a hurry, especially because the reviewer also
praised the feeling of "zeroing in on every note".
With these minimal remarks in hand, I'm a little less hesitant to
recommend Klemperer's Bavarian Radio performance on EMI, with Janet
Baker. I still think the Philharmonia recording is a little dangerous,
though it might be just fine and the balances are probably wind-heavy
enough to be a reasonable similarity to what you heard. I also think
the Gielen recording ($10 at broinc.com; fill out the order with some
other Mahler symphonies) is a good choice--he is also somewhat
deliberate and analytical in terms of balances and pacing.
But again, there are many performances that will be just fine, and the
Kaplan/Vienna Phil, on DG (which is on one disc, so it's not all that
expensive on Amazon's Z-shops), is a great choice for sound and
performance. I have a friend who loves this music yet had only the
Bernstein on Sony, finally decided to get another and chose the Kaplan,
and was simply blown away by how fun it was to listen to this work in
great sound with such a well-thought-out interpretation. (That takes
nothing away from the pleasure you'd get from Bernstein, by the way.)
No one else has mentioned Kaplan, which gives you an idea of how many
possible choices you have here. I know someone who has heard at least
60 recordings of the work and enjoyed every one of them for one reason
or another--admittedly though, not all of those would be in the best
sound.
--Jeff

2006-10-05 19:22:34 UTC

Post by Cory
Thank you all for your recommendations.
I'm going to just go to Borders and check out what they have for sale
and keep all of your thoughts in mind. I'll probably end up with the
Kemplerer, but from what I hear, it's hard to miss the target with such
a great work that is Resurrection.

Don't get us wrong -- it is easy to miss the target.

There are quite a few recordings that don't quite hit the mark. What
you're getting here is people's best recommendations.

-Owen

MELMOTH

2006-10-05 07:08:51 UTC

Ce cher mammifère du nom de ***@comcast.net nous susurrait, le
jeudi 05/10/2006, dans nos oreilles grandes ouvertes mais un peu sales
quand même, et dans le message

Post by m***@comcast.net
For a first Resurrection, I wouldn't recommend the comparatively
straight-laced Klemperer as a first choice, but
rather either the Sony or DG Bernstein, Scherchen, Kubelik on Audite,
or even Stokowski

I did not know that Stokowsky was considered as a conductor...

--
Car avec beaucoup de science, il y a beaucoup de chagrin; et celui qui
accroît sa science, accroît sa douleur.
[Ecclésiaste, 1]
Melmoth - souffrant

k***@yahoo.co.uk

2006-10-06 10:47:51 UTC

Post by MELMOTH
jeudi 05/10/2006, dans nos oreilles grandes ouvertes mais un peu sales
quand même, et dans le message

I did not know that Stokowsky was considered as a conductor...

What a singularly stupid and ignorant remark from someone who can't
even spell the great conductor's name correctly.

The BBC Legends CD notes quote some of the press reviews of the 1963
Stokowski Mahler 2 performance:

"Most impressive was Stokowski's overall control of the music and of
his instrumental forces. ... His was great and noble conducting by any
count, certainly giving us the most moving and most effective
performance of Mahler's 2nd I have ever heard ... and in such hands,
what an overwhelming work it is." (Music and Musicians).

"Leopold Stokowski exercised such superb control as to make one envy
the London Symphony Orchestra which played under him ... his reputation
as a showman seemed totally undeserved ... this outsize work benefited
from Mr Stokowski's great gifts as an organiser of sound and of global
form." (Daily Telegraph).

"The performance of Mahler's 2nd Symphony which Leopold Stokowski
conducted was of the highest order ... That his uncanny genius for
sheer sound should yield an exceptionally vivid and varied range of
instrumental colour was perhaps to be expected. Yet his control of the
those huge outer movements, which so easily grow unwieldy in less
masterly hands than his, bespoke a no less remarkable grasp of
large-scale musical architecture." (The Observer).

Post by MELMOTH
From BBC Legends BBCL 4136-2.

MELMOTH

2006-10-06 14:56:11 UTC

Ce cher mammifère du nom de kerrison126-***@yahoo.co.uk nous
susurrait, le vendredi 06/10/2006, dans nos oreilles grandes ouvertes
mais un peu sales quand même, et dans le message

Post by k***@yahoo.co.uk
The BBC Legends CD notes quote some of the press reviews of the 1963

--
Car avec beaucoup de science, il y a beaucoup de chagrin; et celui qui
accroît sa science, accroît sa douleur.
[Ecclésiaste, 1]
Melmoth - souffrant

k***@yahoo.co.uk

2006-10-06 18:59:28 UTC

Post by MELMOTH
susurrait, le vendredi 06/10/2006, dans nos oreilles grandes ouvertes
mais un peu sales quand même, et dans le message

Post by k***@yahoo.co.uk
The BBC Legends CD notes quote some of the press reviews of the 1963

What do you want I matter about that kind of critics !
Some people like to eat macdos and pepsicolas...why not to listen to
stokowskY...
I think that this circus "conductor" [sic] is appreciated only in
US...European know what are _good_ conductors...
--
Car avec beaucoup de science, il y a beaucoup de chagrin; et celui qui
accroît sa science, accroît sa douleur.
[Ecclésiaste, 1]
Melmoth - souffrant

Once again you show yourself to be a complete ignoramus ... Stokowski
conducted all the great orchestras in Europe and invariably received
rave reviews from the critics for his concerts with the Concertgebouw
in Holland, the Berlin Philharmonic in Germany, the French National
Radio Orchestra in Paris, the Czech Philharmonic in Prague, the London
Symphony in England, and a great many others. When he conducted the
Helsinki City Symphony in an all-Sibelius program in the presence of
the composer in 1953, Sibelius wrote that it had been "unforgettable".
Well, since you obviously haven't heard Stokowski conduct Mahler 2, or
anything else it would seem, your opinion of him is worthless.

I wonder what the American readers of this thread will feel when they
see that "only Europeans know what are good conductors" ...

j***@aol.com

2006-10-06 19:29:26 UTC

Post by k***@yahoo.co.uk

Post by MELMOTH
susurrait, le vendredi 06/10/2006, dans nos oreilles grandes ouvertes
mais un peu sales quand même, et dans le message

Post by k***@yahoo.co.uk
The BBC Legends CD notes quote some of the press reviews of the 1963

Once again you show yourself to be a complete ignoramus ... Stokowski
conducted all the great orchestras in Europe and invariably received
rave reviews from the critics for his concerts with the Concertgebouw
in Holland, the Berlin Philharmonic in Germany, the French National
Radio Orchestra in Paris, the Czech Philharmonic in Prague, the London
Symphony in England, and a great many others. When he conducted the
Helsinki City Symphony in an all-Sibelius program in the presence of
the composer in 1953, Sibelius wrote that it had been "unforgettable".
Well, since you obviously haven't heard Stokowski conduct Mahler 2, or
anything else it would seem, your opinion of him is worthless.
I wonder what the American readers of this thread will feel when they
see that "only Europeans know what are good conductors" ...

Sadly, it must be true. Only Europeans seem to welcome American
conductors with open arms.

--Jeff

Gerard

2006-10-06 19:52:16 UTC

Post by j***@aol.com
Sadly, it must be true. Only Europeans seem to welcome American
conductors with open arms.

"We" did so, with Munch, Szell, Martinon, etc.
Even Järvi.

Michael Schaffer

2006-10-06 20:32:31 UTC

Post by j***@aol.com
Sadly, it must be true. Only Europeans seem to welcome American
conductors with open arms."We" did so, with Munch, Szell, Martinon, etc.

Even Järvi.

Järvi doesn't count.

j***@aol.com

2006-10-07 01:26:21 UTC

Post by Michael Schaffer

Post by j***@aol.com
Sadly, it must be true. Only Europeans seem to welcome American
conductors with open arms."We" did so, with Munch, Szell, Martinon, etc.

Even Järvi.

Järvi doesn't count.

I'm glad someone figured out what "we" were counting. :-)

But which Jarvi and why not?

--Jeff

Michael Schaffer

2006-10-07 01:47:52 UTC

Post by j***@aol.com
Sadly, it must be true. Only Europeans seem to welcome American
conductors with open arms."We" did so, with Munch, Szell, Martinon, etc.

Even Järvi.

Järvi doesn't count.I'm glad someone figured out what "we" were counting. :-)

But which Jarvi and why not?
--Jeff

The older one. I haven't heard any of the younger one's work. Neeme has
no place in the same sentence as Munch, Szell, or Martinon (except for
in this last one). His main interest seems to be to sightread and
record as much music with as little rehearsal and insight as possible.
You can hear in his recordings that a lot of important detail goes by
completely unnoticed and random. He often appears to not know the score
very well. He is not even a good conductor in the sense of
"Kapellmeister" because he lacks the meticulousness and solid
craftsmanship implied by that. He just waves orchestras through the
pieces like a traffic cop in the middle of rush hour.

MIFrost

2006-10-05 16:39:43 UTC

Post by Paul Ilechko
Personally I'm a big fan of Klemperer in this one.

I have, among others, the "live" recording he made with the Bavarian
Radio Symphony Orchestra. I keep eyeing the EMI Philharmonia recording
whenever I'm at a music store, though. If I have the former, will I get
anything new or "improved" in the latter? Just wondering.

MIFrost

j***@aol.com

2006-10-05 17:08:04 UTC

Post by MIFrost

Post by Paul Ilechko
Personally I'm a big fan of Klemperer in this one.

Definitely not. By comparison the Philharmonia recording seems more of
a didactic experience, though inspiring once you get on that
wavelength. It doesn't add anything important.

And don't be tempted by the one on Vox unless you're curious beyond the
usual measure (it's fine on its own, limited-sound, less
voluptuous-playing merits). I doubt the one on Doremi is in decent
sound (but I haven't heard it). The only one I would check into after
the Munich performance is the Concertgebouw performance from the 50s.
It's a hot performance with some really cataclysmic outbursts, even
though Klemperer has his firm control and grim patience as usual (he's
definitely not slow, however), and the orchestra is an amazing
instrument for Mahler, despite glassy, brittle sonics that have plagued
the two versions of this that I've heard.

--Jeff

Matthew B. Tepper

2006-10-05 19:46:40 UTC

The only one I would check into after the Munich performance is the
Concertgebouw performance from the 50s. It's a hot performance with some
really cataclysmic outbursts, even though Klemperer has his firm control
and grim patience as usual (he's definitely not slow, however), and the
orchestra is an amazing instrument for Mahler, despite glassy, brittle
sonics that have plagued the two versions of this that I've heard.

A terrifically exciting performance, which even fits on one CD, unlike some
of his other performances and the studio recording. The soloists are very
much a mixed bag: I love Kathleen Ferrier but can't stand Jo Vincent.

--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/index.html
My main music page --- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/berlioz.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Harrington/Coy is a gay wrestler who won't come out of the closet

j***@aol.com

2006-10-05 19:53:06 UTC

You're not the only one who can't stand Jo Vincent. She only bothers me
a bit.

The studio recording does fit on one CD, somehow. Or at least my MHS
copy does.

--Jeff

Paul Ilechko

2006-10-05 20:10:33 UTC

You're not the only one who can't stand Jo Vincent. She only bothers me
a bit.
The studio recording does fit on one CD, somehow. Or at least my MHS
copy does.

It does.

Richard S. Sandmeyer

2006-10-05 21:57:44 UTC

You're not the only one who can't stand Jo Vincent. She only bothers me
a bit.
The studio recording does fit on one CD, somehow. Or at least my MHS
copy does.
--Jeff

Klemperer's 60s Philharmonia studio recording fits on a single CD in
every reissue of it I've seen (including the current GROC reissue).
Likewise, Klemp's BRSO recording fits on a single CD.

Concerning the Concertgebouw recording, I've found the Membran
International reissue of it to be in the best sound of the several
labels I've heard it on (and it is very inexpensive at Berkshire). As
Matthew notes, this version also fits on a single CD (though a Verona
reissue made it part of a two CD set with other Ferrier items). Of
course, no reissue of that 50s recording is going to provide
demonstration quality audio.

--
Rich Sandmeyer
rich dot sand at verizon dot net

j***@aol.com

2006-10-06 06:53:26 UTC

Post by Richard S. Sandmeyer

You're not the only one who can't stand Jo Vincent. She only bothers me
a bit.
The studio recording does fit on one CD, somehow. Or at least my MHS
copy does.
--Jeff

Klemperer's 60s Philharmonia studio recording fits on a single CD in
every reissue of it I've seen (including the current GROC reissue).
Likewise, Klemp's BRSO recording fits on a single CD.
Concerning the Concertgebouw recording, I've found the Membran
International reissue of it to be in the best sound of the several
labels I've heard it on (and it is very inexpensive at Berkshire). As
Matthew notes, this version also fits on a single CD (though a Verona
reissue made it part of a two CD set with other Ferrier items). Of
course, no reissue of that 50s recording is going to provide
demonstration quality audio.

Thanks for the tip. I can't imagine it ever will sound good, but I
noticed that Membran release at Berkshire and wondered what the
provenance of it was.

--Jeff

d***@aol.com

2006-10-05 02:32:08 UTC

There are numerous extremely fine performances of the 2nd on CD. Among
my favorites are:

Boulez, BBC SO (live, 1973), especially if the BBC SO reissues this in
better sound (which is now a real possibility)
Bernstein, New York Philharmonic
Kubelik & the Bavarians (DG, not Audite, which I haven't heard)

I have never heard any conductor, not even the Scherchen- and
Mitropoulos-like ones, sound as urgent as Boulez in this performance,
which, for my money, is one of the two or three best performances of a
Mahler symphony Boulez ever gave. The choral ending, which is the kind
of slowly unfolding crescendo form that plays to some of Boulez's
specific strengths as a conductor, is unbelievably good - better than
any other I've heard - but so is the desperately wild ride through the
whole sprawling movement that precedes it. Avoid the dull
misrepresentation with Boulez on DG at all costs.

The live Kubelik performances on Audite are supposed to trump the
contemporaneous DG recordings. But in my experience so far, they
haven't, and the DG are better recorded. Even if it turns out that I
like the live 2nd on Audite - a very real possibility - I can't imagine
it altering my opinion of the DG 2nd, which is one of the very best
performances in the complete DG set with Kubelik.

Neither of the later Bernstein recordings can touch his first.

-david gable

ex-neo-con

2006-10-05 04:45:04 UTC

Personally, I prefer the DG Bernstein to his earlier two, although the
NYPO Columbia recording certainly comes in a respectable second. (I
don't really care much for the LSO recording, not because of the
performance but because of the sound.) My most recent impression of
the NYPO Columbia performance, particularly in the first movement, is
that LB was still trying to work out his interpretation. Nevertheless,
it's a fascinating performance.

It's been my impression that, for many years, the NYPO Columbia was the
target of widespread critical censure. (Perhaps that's the reason why
Sony waited so long to reissue it on CD, preceding it with two reissues
of the later LSO recording.) I thought that such views of the first LB
recording had "gone the way of all flesh" until I recently happened
upon Richard Osborne's review of the DG Boulez recording in a recent
issue of Gramophone. Osborne begins his review thusly:

Mahler's Resurrection Symphony has become a somewhat
elusive work of late. Is this down to a lack of belief
in the piece or a lack of experience of it? In the
early days of the Mahler revival, there were
authoritative albeit contrasted recordings by Bruno
Walter and Otto Klemperer. There was also a superbly
conducted Solti version for those in a search of a less
encumbered view of what is (let us not forget) a young
man's quest. Provided you avoided Bernstein's
grotesquely self-regarding 1964 New York recording
(dubbed 'monstrous' by Deryck Cooke, though nowadays
sounding merely comic), you could hardly go wrong.

So, I'm readin' this an' I'm thinkin', "What the hell planet does
Osborne think he's on?"

Go figure.

ex-neo-con

Post by d***@aol.com
There are numerous extremely fine performances of the 2nd on CD. Among
Boulez, BBC SO (live, 1973), especially if the BBC SO reissues this in
better sound (which is now a real possibility)
Bernstein, New York Philharmonic
Kubelik & the Bavarians (DG, not Audite, which I haven't heard)
I have never heard any conductor, not even the Scherchen- and
Mitropoulos-like ones, sound as urgent as Boulez in this performance,
which, for my money, is one of the two or three best performances of a
Mahler symphony Boulez ever gave. The choral ending, which is the kind
of slowly unfolding crescendo form that plays to some of Boulez's
specific strengths as a conductor, is unbelievably good - better than
any other I've heard - but so is the desperately wild ride through the
whole sprawling movement that precedes it. Avoid the dull
misrepresentation with Boulez on DG at all costs.
The live Kubelik performances on Audite are supposed to trump the
contemporaneous DG recordings. But in my experience so far, they
haven't, and the DG are better recorded. Even if it turns out that I
like the live 2nd on Audite - a very real possibility - I can't imagine
it altering my opinion of the DG 2nd, which is one of the very best
performances in the complete DG set with Kubelik.
Neither of the later Bernstein recordings can touch his first.
-david gable

j***@aol.com

2006-10-05 05:03:37 UTC

Post by ex-neo-con
Personally, I prefer the DG Bernstein to his earlier two, although the
NYPO Columbia recording certainly comes in a respectable second. (I
don't really care much for the LSO recording, not because of the
performance but because of the sound.) My most recent impression of
the NYPO Columbia performance, particularly in the first movement, is
that LB was still trying to work out his interpretation. Nevertheless,
it's a fascinating performance.
It's been my impression that, for many years, the NYPO Columbia was the
target of widespread critical censure. (Perhaps that's the reason why
Sony waited so long to reissue it on CD, preceding it with two reissues
of the later LSO recording.) I thought that such views of the first LB
recording had "gone the way of all flesh" until I recently happened
upon Richard Osborne's review of the DG Boulez recording in a recent
Mahler's Resurrection Symphony has become a somewhat
elusive work of late. Is this down to a lack of belief
in the piece or a lack of experience of it? In the
early days of the Mahler revival, there were
authoritative albeit contrasted recordings by Bruno
Walter and Otto Klemperer. There was also a superbly
conducted Solti version for those in a search of a less
encumbered view of what is (let us not forget) a young
man's quest. Provided you avoided Bernstein's
grotesquely self-regarding 1964 New York recording
(dubbed 'monstrous' by Deryck Cooke, though nowadays
sounding merely comic), you could hardly go wrong.
So, I'm readin' this an' I'm thinkin', "What the hell planet does
Osborne think he's on?"
Go figure.
ex-neo-con

He's not on my planet. It's a gripping performance--not a second of it
is self-regarding. I had no idea the piece was ever really "elusive"
particularly. I wonder what that refers to.

--Jeff

Bob Harper

2006-10-05 05:07:50 UTC

ex-neo-con wrote:
(snip)
(quoting Richard Osborne)
Provided you avoided Bernstein's

Post by ex-neo-con
grotesquely self-regarding 1964 New York recording
(dubbed 'monstrous' by Deryck Cooke, though nowadays
sounding merely comic), you could hardly go wrong.

(snip)
A prime candidate for the single dumbest remark ever made by a critic.

Bob Harper

d***@aol.com

2006-10-05 05:10:19 UTC

Post by Bob Harper
(quoting Richard Osborne)
Provided you avoided Bernstein's

Post by ex-neo-con
grotesquely self-regarding 1964 New York recording
(dubbed 'monstrous' by Deryck Cooke, though nowadays
sounding merely comic), you could hardly go wrong.

A prime candidate for the single dumbest remark ever made by a critic.

I can't tell if it's dumb: I have no idea what he means.

-david gable

j***@aol.com

2006-10-05 05:22:30 UTC

Of course we agree on the greatness of the Boulez/BBC performance, but
it isn't good enough sounding to be a really good recommendation for a
first purchase of this piece. Close, but not quite good enough. And the
competition isn't so bad or unexciting that I would recommend Boulez.
If the BBC issues it in improved sound, we might reconsider.

I don't know any "Mitropoulos-like" Mahler 2s, but Scherchen-like
Mahler 2s...Scherchen's own recording, that is...is a really exciting
and eye-opening experience. But again, it lacks that overwhelming
quality of sound and playing that I would choose for a first recording.
Same with Walter's recording on Columbia, another great performance
that was at one time a first recommendation for Mahler 2.

If there's anybody who approached Mahler with the sanity of a modernist
and the expression of a romantic, but only lacking the desperation of
an expressionist, he would be Schuricht. The two Schuricht Mahler 2s
I've heard are overwhelming, just not in good enough sound or polished
enough playing to be recommendable for a first or second version of the
work.

--Jeff

Raymond Hall

2006-10-05 06:33:42 UTC

Post by j***@aol.com
I don't know any "Mitropoulos-like" Mahler 2s, but Scherchen-like
Mahler 2s...Scherchen's own recording, that is...is a really exciting
and eye-opening experience. But again, it lacks that overwhelming
quality of sound and playing that I would choose for a first recording.
Same with Walter's recording on Columbia, another great performance
that was at one time a first recommendation for Mahler 2.

Am glad you mentioned Walter on Sony. A great performance, but showing its
age soundwise now. Often forgotten when Mahler 2nds are mentioned, but the
coupling is a better recorded 1st symphony. One of the best imho. Certainly
a twofer that deserves to be in all Mahler collections.

Haven't heard the Boulez yet.

Ray H
Taree, NSW

Andy Evans

2006-10-05 12:19:02 UTC

Walter on Sony. A great performance, a twofer that deserves to be in
all Mahler collections. >>

Well Ray, as the author of the recent "I hate Mahler" thread, I think
I'm reformed. I bought this and love it. Now going for the rest of the
symphonies. Andy

Raymond Hall

2006-10-05 13:15:06 UTC

Post by Andy Evans
Walter on Sony. A great performance, a twofer that deserves to be in
all Mahler collections. >>
Well Ray, as the author of the recent "I hate Mahler" thread, I think
I'm reformed. I bought this and love it. Now going for the rest of the
symphonies. Andy

Great to hear of another potential Mahler freak. Where will it ever end?

Don't tell me you may have Bruckner to explore still, because that
conversion is gonna be a lot lot harder <g>
It is difficult to dislike Mahler really ..... or so it goes ....

Ray H
Taree, NSW

Paul Ilechko

2006-10-05 14:23:00 UTC

Great to hear of another potential Mahler freak. Where will it ever end?

So now we just have to get Simon to submit to Debussy ;-)

Andy Evans

2006-10-05 15:01:40 UTC

So now we just have to get Simon to submit to Debussy >>

He may need an anaesthetic.

Paul Ilechko

2006-10-05 15:04:57 UTC

Post by Andy Evans
So now we just have to get Simon to submit to Debussy >>
He may need an anaesthetic.

You hold him down, I'll glue the headphones on ...

Paul Ilechko

2006-10-05 12:43:41 UTC

I have that twofer, and really like the First Symphony and the Lieder
Eines Fahrenden Gesellen; but the 2nd really doesn't cut it for me - he
really does not keep up any level of intensity, and the music meanders
to a conclusion, saying very little. IMO, of course.

HPLeft

2006-10-05 02:38:35 UTC

I don't know about "best", but the performance I reach for most often is
Bernstein/NYP for DG.

Matt C

j***@telenet.be

2006-10-05 04:01:07 UTC

Don't hesitate to acquire the Stokowski with the London Symphony
Orchestra from 30 july 1963 (there are other Mahler seconds with
Stokowski and London orchestras). You should not "even" consider
Stokowski as was written in one of the messages, you should really do
it without any reservation. (One must not be ashamed to like
Stokowski). It is published in the series BBC Legends and it's really
overwhelming. (more information probably on www.imgartists.com) Another
first choice is without any doubt Abbado's recent version with the
Lucerne festival Orchestra on DG. Of course there are other fine
versions, in most cases already mentioned, for example
Rattle/Birmingham.
Joachim

2006-10-05 04:52:53 UTC

There are a lot of good Mahler #2's out there. Klemperor's is great -
I'll suggest another one in excellent sound:

<http://www.amazon.co.uk/Mahler-Resurrection-Symphony-No-2/dp/B00006879J>

This is an excellent recording and in terrific sound. Yoel Levi has a
nice feel for the work. Note: This looks like it might be out of
print in the US. Check the bargain bins, you might be able to find it
cheap!

-Owen

j***@aol.com

2006-10-05 05:10:06 UTC

There are a lot of good Mahler #2's out there. Klemperor's is great -
<http://www.amazon.co.uk/Mahler-Resurrection-Symphony-No-2/dp/B00006879J>
This is an excellent recording and in terrific sound. Yoel Levi has a
nice feel for the work. Note: This looks like it might be out of
print in the US. Check the bargain bins, you might be able to find it
cheap!
-Owen

It is a fine recording and is often cheap at Berkshire Record Outlet
but not right now. Note however that two other very well recorded and
excellent Mahler 2s are there at bargain price: Gielen's and Chailly's.
Of the two I lean toward Gielen, but there's no doubt the Chailly is
well produced and played. So is Blomstedt/SFS, another we tend to
forget about, and that one is on one disc, assuming it's still
available.

--Jeff

k***@yahoo.co.uk

2006-10-05 06:25:13 UTC

The tremendous Stokowski / London Symphony version of Mahler 2 on the
BBC Legends label (from its Promenade Concert premiere in 1963) sounds
infinitely better in this transfer than in its previous incarnation on
Music and Arts (the BBC had better source material). It's also worth
having for Janet Baker, then in glorious voice. His later studio
recording for RCA (with Brigitte Fassbaender in place of Baker) wasn't
quite as electrifying but was still pretty remarkable. The "live'
Philadelphia and American Symphony performances knocking around on
private CDs match neither in terms of performance nor sound quality.

j***@aol.com

2006-10-05 06:35:55 UTC

Post by k***@yahoo.co.uk

I haven't heard the ASO, but the Philadelphia performance was certainly
not Stokie's best. Was there some sort of cut in that as well? I
vaguely remember something odd about it.

--Jeff

Paul Ilechko

2006-10-05 12:44:32 UTC

Post by j***@aol.com
It is a fine recording and is often cheap at Berkshire Record Outlet
but not right now. Note however that two other very well recorded and
excellent Mahler 2s are there at bargain price: Gielen's and Chailly's.
Of the two I lean toward Gielen, but there's no doubt the Chailly is
well produced and played. So is Blomstedt/SFS, another we tend to
forget about, and that one is on one disc, assuming it's still
available.

BTW, Gielen is at BRO - I recently ordered it.

w***@comcast.net

2006-10-05 15:10:33 UTC

Post by j***@aol.com
So is Blomstedt/SFS, another we tend to
forget about, and that one is on one disc, assuming it's still
available.

Unless it's been reissued, the Blomstedt is on two discs.

Bill

Joe Martin

2006-10-05 21:16:11 UTC

***@aol.com wrote:
Gielen's and Chailly's.

Post by j***@aol.com
Of the two I lean toward Gielen, but there's no doubt the Chailly is
well produced and played. So is Blomstedt/SFS, another we tend to
forget about, and that one is on one disc, assuming it's still
available.

I quite like the Gielen--was wondering if his name was going to come
up, and glad to see it did. I would place him, along with the Abaddo
Lucerne, as favorites among recent recordings.

Still, I would agree with those who recommend Klemps to the OP.

Matthew Vaughan

2006-10-06 06:10:09 UTC

Post by j***@aol.com
So is Blomstedt/SFS, another we tend to
forget about, and that one is on one disc, assuming it's still
available.

I don't think it's still available, but unless they repackaged it, it was
actually on 2 discs (the first movement was alone on the first CD), but it
was at a normal price for a single CD and in a standard-sized package for a
single CD.

j***@aol.com

2006-10-06 06:50:17 UTC

Post by Matthew Vaughan

Post by j***@aol.com
So is Blomstedt/SFS, another we tend to
forget about, and that one is on one disc, assuming it's still
available.

Thanks for the correction--two discs for the price of one it was.

--Jeff

Matthew Vaughan

2006-10-06 10:53:00 UTC

Post by Matthew Vaughan

Post by j***@aol.com
So is Blomstedt/SFS, another we tend to
forget about, and that one is on one disc, assuming it's still
available.

Actually another correction, I think maybe it IS still available. See, for
instance,
http://www.amazon.com/Mahler-Symphony-No-2-Herbert-Blomstedt/dp/B00000423M/sr=8-1/qid=1160131681/ref=sr_1_1/002-9875850-0669615?ie=UTF8&s=music

Great sound and playing, and I really loved this recording, but overall I
like the performances in the newer MTT recording better.

Matthew Silverstein

2006-10-06 13:55:48 UTC

Post by Matthew Vaughan
Great sound and playing, and I really loved this recording, but overall I
like the performances in the newer MTT recording better.

I agree about the Blomstedt--it's definitely underrated. It's a relatively
straightforward central performance that doesn't pull its punches. In fact,
some of the big moments are very powerful.

Matty

MELMOTH

2006-10-05 07:06:25 UTC

Ce cher mammifère du nom de ***@gmail.com nous susurrait, le
jeudi 05/10/2006, dans nos oreilles grandes ouvertes mais un peu sales
quand même, et dans le message

There are _at least_ 20 excellents versions of that symphony !...
I guess that _all_ recommended versions here will be exceptionnal !...
I have personnaly 12 versions...that are _all_ very
good...necessarily...

--
Car avec beaucoup de science, il y a beaucoup de chagrin; et celui qui
accroît sa science, accroît sa douleur.
[Ecclésiaste, 1]
Melmoth - souffrant

Paul Ilechko

2006-10-05 12:45:30 UTC

Post by MELMOTH
jeudi 05/10/2006, dans nos oreilles grandes ouvertes mais un peu sales
quand même, et dans le message

Why do you have 12 when it doesn't matter which one you have? After all,
they are all professional musicians, so there's no difference ...

MELMOTH

2006-10-05 15:06:46 UTC

Ce cher mammifère du nom de Paul Ilechko nous susurrait, le jeudi
05/10/2006, dans nos oreilles grandes ouvertes mais un peu sales quand

Why do you have 12 when it doesn't matter which one you have? After all, they
are all professional musicians, so there's no difference ...

Why ?...
But because thy are _all good_...
But _all different_...

--
Car avec beaucoup de science, il y a beaucoup de chagrin; et celui qui
accroît sa science, accroît sa douleur.
[Ecclésiaste, 1]
Melmoth - souffrant

Gerard

2006-10-05 08:44:53 UTC

I had a favorite (which is not the same as "the best") during a long time: Solti
with the LSO (Decca).
Only Bernstein came close.
The rest was like lukewarm tea to me. Specially Tennstedt (EMI) and Chailly
(Decca).

But Ozawa's 2nd recording (Sony, live) changed my mind.
So now I am without a favorite and without a "best" version.
There are many good ones.

MELMOTH

2006-10-05 08:59:25 UTC

Ce cher mammifère du nom de Gerard nous susurrait, le jeudi 05/10/2006,
dans nos oreilles grandes ouvertes mais un peu sales quand même, et

Post by Gerard
There are many good ones.

Just what I was saying !...

--
Car avec beaucoup de science, il y a beaucoup de chagrin; et celui qui
accroît sa science, accroît sa douleur.
[Ecclésiaste, 1]
Melmoth - souffrant

2006-10-05 15:14:02 UTC

Tennstedt's live recording (in the twofer with the first symphony) on
the Memories label is much better -- I don't think I've ever heard a
more fiery finale.

Post by Gerard
But Ozawa's 2nd recording (Sony, live) changed my mind.
So now I am without a favorite and without a "best" version.
There are many good ones.

I was about to mention Ozawa's as well - a fine performance, and
Ozawa's in his element here.

-Owen

Todd Schurk

2006-10-05 18:38:24 UTC

Tennstedt's live recording (in the twofer with the first symphony) on
the Memories label is much better -- I don't think I've ever heard a
more fiery finale.

Post by Gerard
But Ozawa's 2nd recording (Sony, live) changed my mind.
So now I am without a favorite and without a "best" version.
There are many good ones.

I was about to mention Ozawa's as well - a fine performance, and
Ozawa's in his element here.
-Owen

I must agree with the live Tennstedt on "Memories", one of the great
2nd's-a shattering affair.

Matthew Silverstein

2006-10-05 14:28:00 UTC

Since you're new to this symphony (and presumably to Mahler in
general), I would recommend one or both othe following:

Bernstein's first NYPO recording (on Sony in the Bernstein Century
series)
Mehta's VPO recording (a single mid-priced Decca disc)

If you want state-of-the-art sound, try:

Ozawa's Saito Kinen recording (on Sony)
Michael Tilson Thomas' recent SFS recording

The Bernstein is a wonderfully emotional and intense performance. As
far as I'm concerned, the only downside of this recording is the very
subpar contralto; her over-enunciation of the German in 'Urlicht' (the
brief fourth movement) pretty much ruins the movement for me. Mehta's
highs aren't as high as Bernstein's, but it's an exciting and moving
performance without any serious flaws. The VPO plays this music better
than they have before or since, and the soloists and choir are superb.

Many people have recommended Klemperer. Klemperer's approach to Mahler
2 is much less extreme than Bernstein and Mehta's. If what you like the
about Mahler are the emotional highs and lows, with very slow slow
movements and fast and exciting fast movements, then I would stay away
from Klemperer. He tends to lessen the extremes in both directions
(especially in the long outer movements), making for (some would say) a
more symphonic experience. But for a relative beginner, I would advise
staying away from Klemperer.

Matty

Michael Schaffer

2006-10-05 20:00:13 UTC

Post by c***@gmail.com
I just heard Mahler's Resurrection on internet radio and it is a
masterpiece! I would like to buy a recording of it but don't know
which one to purchase. What are your thoughts?Since you're new to this symphony (and presumably to Mahler in

Bernstein's first NYPO recording (on Sony in the Bernstein Century
series)
Mehta's VPO recording (a single mid-priced Decca disc)
Ozawa's Saito Kinen recording (on Sony)
Michael Tilson Thomas' recent SFS recording
The Bernstein is a wonderfully emotional and intense performance. As
far as I'm concerned, the only downside of this recording is the very
subpar contralto; her over-enunciation of the German in 'Urlicht' (the
brief fourth movement) pretty much ruins the movement for me. Mehta's
highs aren't as high as Bernstein's, but it's an exciting and moving
performance without any serious flaws. The VPO plays this music better
than they have before or since, and the soloists and choir are superb.

They have recorded the 2nd at least 4 times since then (Maazel, Abbado,
Kaplan, Boulez). Although not all of these performances are among my
favorites (Maazel is good but I didn't find the performance
particularly interesting, Abbado is strangely off - his least
successful Mahler recording, I think -, Kaplan is quite interesting,
the Boulez DG recording I haven't heard yet, but the live recording
posted recently is simply stunning in every respect), the orchestral
playing on all of them is top shelf.

I also heard the first movement from the Ozawa/Saito Kinen recording
recently and was very positively surprised by the attention to fine
detail and phrasing. That might be something I would like to try some
time.

Post by Matthew Silverstein
Many people have recommended Klemperer. Klemperer's approach to Mahler
2 is much less extreme than Bernstein and Mehta's. If what you like the
about Mahler are the emotional highs and lows, with very slow slow
movements and fast and exciting fast movements, then I would stay away
from Klemperer. He tends to lessen the extremes in both directions
(especially in the long outer movements), making for (some would say) a
more symphonic experience. But for a relative beginner, I would advise
staying away from Klemperer.
Matty

Alan P Dawes

2006-10-05 14:36:08 UTC

A very useful resource when choosing a recording of a Mahler symphony is
Tony Duggan's survey of the Mahler Symphonies which can be found at
http://www.musicweb-international.com/Mahler/index.html

That along with the comments on the newsgroup should help you to narrow
down your choice.

My own favourite is Klemperer (perhaps because of memories from nearly 40
years ago of the first time I heard the 2nd live at the festival hall
conducted by a very very frail old man - Otto Klemperer). I've also got
other recordings. My first as a teenager in the early 60s a World Record
Club LP conducted by Hermann Scherchen that really bowled me over then and
started my subsequent love of Mahler's works, however listening to the
remastered CD recently after a gap of 30 years didn't live up to my
expectations. Haitink LP in Mahler boxed set nothing special a 'straight'
reading that like the Kaplan / LSO CD would be good for studying the
score. The Vonk in the first very cheap Brilliant box surprised me by how
good the performance was but rather let down by the thin string and organ
sound. Rattle with the CBSO is one that I regularly come back to and is a
good reminder of concert performances. Bernstein NYPO - well its
'Bernstein's Mahler' exciting and special in its own way, perhaps a young
person's Mahler but when I recently bought the Sony remastered set of his
early New York Phil performances even at my more mature age the thrill was
still there.

I don't regret having bought any of those recordings they all have
something to say and I would have been more than pleased to have had any
of them to start my journeym into Mahler's music 40 odd years ago.

However to me the Klemperer recordings are very special and still have the
ability to surprise me with something I hadn't noticed before. I have 2,
the studio recording with the Philharmonia Chorus and Orchestra which I
wouldn't hesitate to recommend with its great performance, playing and
sound on the recent GROC remastering (EMI 5 67235 2) and the live 1965
Munich recording remastered and issued about 8 years ago in the EMI
Klemperer Legacy series (EMI 5 66867 2). It is a live recording which adds
that bit extra to the performance (but also means that the sound and
playing are not as good as the studio set) and does have Janet Baker whose
voice I think brings something special to Mahler. Because it conjures up
that evening in the festival hall on 20th May 1971 this is my 'best'
performance. But it doesn't stop me from listening to and thouroughly
enjoyng other recordings of the work.

'Best' in music recordings is alway a very personnal thing.

If you are just starting out on listening to Mahler then you have a
lifetime of discovery and enjoyment ahead.

Best wishes
Alan

--
--. --. --. --. : : --- --- ----------------------------
|_| |_| | _ | | | | |_ | ***@argonet.co.uk
| | |\ | | | | |\| | | ***@riscos.org
| | | \ |_| |_| | | |__ | Using an Acorn RiscPC

francis

2006-10-05 15:29:16 UTC

Has anyone heard (or better have a copy of) Artur Rodzinski's NY
Philharmonic performance of the Resurrection? The broadcast was
Sunday, December 5, 1943 and the soloists were Astrid Varnay and Enid
Szantho. Also on that program, Leonard Bernstein conducted Ernest
Bloch's Three Jewish Poems--the first occasion the young assistant
conductor led the Philharmonic after his sensational debut as
last-minute sub for the indisposed Bruno Walter.

Matthew Silverstein

2006-10-05 17:53:30 UTC

Post by Alan P Dawes
Bernstein NYPO - well its
'Bernstein's Mahler' [snip]

And the Klemperer recording is Klemperer's Mahler, and the Mehta
recording is Mehta's Mahler, and the Barbirolli recording is
Barbirolli's Mahler, and . . .

Matty

d***@aol.com

2006-10-05 20:03:57 UTC

Post by Alan P Dawes
Bernstein NYPO - well its
'Bernstein's Mahler' [snip]

And the Klemperer recording is Klemperer's Mahler, and the Mehta
recording is Mehta's Mahler, and the Barbirolli recording is
Barbirolli's Mahler, and . . .

True, but an absurd and literal-minded response. The poster means,
"You know what Lenny is like, and you know what his Mahler is supposed
to be like. Well, this is it." Hard to imagine anyone writing:

Mehta/VPO - well it's "Mehta's Mahler." [in quotation marks]

"Bernstein's Mahler" is a widely publicized commodity, Bernstein one of
the most famous conductors of the past half century, one widely reputed
to be a great champion of Mahler and a great Mahlerian. He's also the
figure the anti-Bernstein revisionists take on: "I'm the
anti-Bernstein." You find Dohnanyi saying as much in his notes to his
Decca Mahler 6, and you find similar comments from posters here who
dislike Bernstein. The same is not true of "Mehta's Mahler." Fans of
the new Boulez recording don't say, "This is for people who dislike
Mehta's sweaty approach." They say, "This is for people who dislike
Bernstein's sweaty approach."

The fact that I like the younger Mehta's Mahler very much, the fact
that I find it both marvelous and more Viennese than the Viennese, is
completely irrelevant to my point. (Yes, I know it's the VPO in the
2nd that you and I like so much. He would have sounded every bit as
Viennese with the LAPO, as his Schoenberg recordings prove. Boulez
certainly doesn't sound more Viennese than the Viennese in his VPO
Bruckner 8th.)

-david gable

Michael Schaffer

2006-10-05 22:45:33 UTC

Post by Alan P Dawes
Bernstein NYPO - well its
'Bernstein's Mahler' [snip]

And the Klemperer recording is Klemperer's Mahler, and the Mehta
recording is Mehta's Mahler, and the Barbirolli recording is
Barbirolli's Mahler, and . . .True, but an absurd and literal-minded response. The poster means,

"You know what Lenny is like, and you know what his Mahler is supposed
Mehta/VPO - well it's "Mehta's Mahler." [in quotation marks]
"Bernstein's Mahler" is a widely publicized commodity, Bernstein one of
the most famous conductors of the past half century, one widely reputed
to be a great champion of Mahler and a great Mahlerian. He's also the
figure the anti-Bernstein revisionists take on: "I'm the
anti-Bernstein." You find Dohnanyi saying as much in his notes to his
Decca Mahler 6, and you find similar comments from posters here who
dislike Bernstein. The same is not true of "Mehta's Mahler." Fans of
the new Boulez recording don't say, "This is for people who dislike
Mehta's sweaty approach." They say, "This is for people who dislike
Bernstein's sweaty approach."
The fact that I like the younger Mehta's Mahler very much, the fact
that I find it both marvelous and more Viennese than the Viennese, is
completely irrelevant to my point. (Yes, I know it's the VPO in the
2nd that you and I like so much. He would have sounded every bit as
Viennese with the LAPO, as his Schoenberg recordings prove. Boulez
certainly doesn't sound more Viennese than the Viennese in his VPO
Bruckner 8th.)
-david gable

What do you mean by "more Viennese than the Viennese"?

j***@aol.com

2006-10-06 01:27:21 UTC

Post by Alan P Dawes
Bernstein NYPO - well its
'Bernstein's Mahler' [snip]

And the Klemperer recording is Klemperer's Mahler, and the Mehta
recording is Mehta's Mahler, and the Barbirolli recording is
Barbirolli's Mahler, and . . .

True, but an absurd and literal-minded response. The poster means,
"You know what Lenny is like, and you know what his Mahler is supposed
Mehta/VPO - well it's "Mehta's Mahler." [in quotation marks]
"Bernstein's Mahler" is a widely publicized commodity, Bernstein one of
the most famous conductors of the past half century, one widely reputed
to be a great champion of Mahler and a great Mahlerian. He's also the
figure the anti-Bernstein revisionists take on: "I'm the
anti-Bernstein." You find Dohnanyi saying as much in his notes to his
Decca Mahler 6, and you find similar comments from posters here who
dislike Bernstein. The same is not true of "Mehta's Mahler." Fans of
the new Boulez recording don't say, "This is for people who dislike
Mehta's sweaty approach." They say, "This is for people who dislike
Bernstein's sweaty approach."
The fact that I like the younger Mehta's Mahler very much, the fact
that I find it both marvelous and more Viennese than the Viennese, is
completely irrelevant to my point. (Yes, I know it's the VPO in the
2nd that you and I like so much. He would have sounded every bit as
Viennese with the LAPO, as his Schoenberg recordings prove. Boulez
certainly doesn't sound more Viennese than the Viennese in his VPO
Bruckner 8th.)
-david gable

I'm not sure why "Mehta's Mahler" is such an absurd statement. I've
come to expect a certain thickness, warmth and Romanticism with decent
energy but not alot of emphasis on unusual color from Mehta. His Mahler
strikes me as more like Brahms in its density that the usual Mahler,
which can as you know be quite delicate especially in the later pieces.
Mahler has a rather light and then bold touch with his orchestral
colors, and Mehta rarely seems to accentuate that characteristic. Yes,
he knows schmaltz, but he doesn't layer it as ironically on the more
modernistic effect. To me, that is Mehta's Mahler, through and through.
I know no other conductor quite like that.

--Jeff

Michael Schaffer

2006-10-06 07:13:23 UTC

Post by Alan P Dawes
Bernstein NYPO - well its
'Bernstein's Mahler' [snip]

And the Klemperer recording is Klemperer's Mahler, and the Mehta
recording is Mehta's Mahler, and the Barbirolli recording is
Barbirolli's Mahler, and . . .

come to expect a certain thickness, warmth and Romanticism with decent
energy but not alot of emphasis on unusual color from Mehta. His Mahler
strikes me as more like Brahms in its density that the usual Mahler,
which can as you know be quite delicate especially in the later pieces.
Mahler has a rather light and then bold touch with his orchestral
colors, and Mehta rarely seems to accentuate that characteristic. Yes,
he knows schmaltz, but he doesn't layer it as ironically on the more
modernistic effect. To me, that is Mehta's Mahler, through and through.
I know no other conductor quite like that.
--Jeff

Hm. I replied to this earlier today, saying that I thought this was a
very perceptive description of "Mehta's Mahler". Somehow, that didn't
get posted.
Anyway, I was also wondering what your thoughts are about Maazel's
Mahler.

j***@aol.com

2006-10-06 07:27:55 UTC

Post by Michael Schaffer

Post by Alan P Dawes
Bernstein NYPO - well its
'Bernstein's Mahler' [snip]

And the Klemperer recording is Klemperer's Mahler, and the Mehta
recording is Mehta's Mahler, and the Barbirolli recording is
Barbirolli's Mahler, and . . .

I was very enthusiastic about the Maazel cycle when I first listened to
it. Some of the tempi were very broad, but nothing seemed unpleasantly
slow. More importantly, both sound and playing are fabulous. This is
certainly an impressive set for a late night when the neighbors are
away and you can pump up the volume close your eyes, and feel the full
cosmic effect of Mahler's brilliant orchestration painted in hues that
are paradoxically both mahoganied and steely, much as one might expect
from a partnership of this conductor and this orchestra. Despite
Maazel's reputation for being disengaged emotionally, I was hooked on
the intensity of sound as much as anything.

But that's my teenager-becomes-an-adult-with-lots-of-cool-toys
response. As for the musical quality of Maazel's leadership...he's not
always on my wavelength, but I will have to listen again for a more,
um, considered, response. That may never happen.

I am sure, though, that the 7th is a sleeper of a performance, one of
the very best--by turns deliberate, menacing, exotic, powerful, tender,
and playful--ok, only a little bit playful. Maazel is not a charmer.

On the other hand, I have cooled on the 4th to some extent (it was the
first 4 I bought on CD actually, long before I broke down and picked up
the set): Maazel now just seems too slow and smooth overall. He had
better character in his earlier recording. Reevaluation of the others
in the Vienna set awaits the neighbors' next vacation.

--Jeff

Michael Schaffer

2006-10-06 20:43:43 UTC

Post by Michael Schaffer
Anyway, I was also wondering what your thoughts are about Maazel's
Mahler.

That's another very good description. I will steal that and use as if I
had come up with it myself. It also seems to me to be a good
description for a not too different kind of sound quality Muti gets
from the orchestra, although I think the "Muti sound" is more
monochrome, has less finely varied hues than Maazel's.

I agree about the orchestral contribution (not surprisingly, I guess)
and the recorded sound. It is not recorded "in your face", and has
quite a bit of dynamic range, so it needs good equipment to be listened
to. I like to listen to these recordings on headphones because there is
so much fine detail.

Do you have such an eloquent description for the "Boulez sound" (with
the WP and other orchestras), too?

Post by j***@aol.com
Despite
Maazel's reputation for being disengaged emotionally, I was hooked on
the intensity of sound as much as anything.
But that's my teenager-becomes-an-adult-with-lots-of-cool-toys
response. As for the musical quality of Maazel's leadership...he's not
always on my wavelength, but I will have to listen again for a more,
um, considered, response. That may never happen.
I am sure, though, that the 7th is a sleeper of a performance, one of
the very best--by turns deliberate, menacing, exotic, powerful, tender,
and playful--ok, only a little bit playful. Maazel is not a charmer.
On the other hand, I have cooled on the 4th to some extent (it was the
first 4 I bought on CD actually, long before I broke down and picked up
the set): Maazel now just seems too slow and smooth overall. He had
better character in his earlier recording. Reevaluation of the others
in the Vienna set awaits the neighbors' next vacation.
--Jeff

I also like the 7th particularly. Maazel really makes sense of the
music, especially in the outer movements where a lot of other
conductors seem to get lost.
I haven't listened to the 4th in a long time, but I remember finding
Kathleen Battle's contribution near ideal.
I relistened to the 3rd recently and enjoyed that a lot. Maazel is
fairly slow in places, but he offers a lot of interesting detail
insight.

Matthew Silverstein

2006-10-06 07:43:05 UTC

Post by Matthew Silverstein
And the Klemperer recording is Klemperer's Mahler, and the Mehta
recording is Mehta's Mahler, and the Barbirolli recording is
Barbirolli's Mahler, and . . .

True, but an absurd and literal-minded response. The poster means,
"You know what Lenny is like, and you know what his Mahler is supposed
to be like. Well, this is it."

Actually, the reason I posted my "absurd and literal-minded response" is
that too many times I've seen the phrase "Bernstein's Mahler" used to
suggest something quite negative, especially when Bernstein is being
compared to Klemperer. The idea is that Bernstein gives us Bernstein's
Mahler whereas Klemperer gives us Mahler's Mahler--or Mahler simpliciter.
My response was meant as a reaction to this ridiculous idea, which I was
reading into Alan's comment. He may not have meant to say this, but it's
the sort of things that gets said all the time. (For example, it's all over
Tony Duggan's Mahler survey.)

Matty

Gerard

2006-10-06 08:43:08 UTC

Post by Matthew Silverstein
And the Klemperer recording is Klemperer's Mahler, and the Mehta
recording is Mehta's Mahler, and the Barbirolli recording is
Barbirolli's Mahler, and . . .

True, but an absurd and literal-minded response. The poster means,
"You know what Lenny is like, and you know what his Mahler is
supposed to be like. Well, this is it."

Why is it a ridiculous idea? (If you mean that referring to "Bernstein's Mahler"
is to suggest something negative.) For some people "Bernstein's Mahler" _is_
something negative, e.g. an equivalent for "overdone Mahler".

Matthew Silverstein

2006-10-06 13:54:40 UTC

Post by Gerard
Why is it a ridiculous idea? (If you mean that referring to "Bernstein's Mahler"
is to suggest something negative.) For some people "Bernstein's Mahler" _is_
something negative, e.g. an equivalent for "overdone Mahler".

No, that's not the ridiculous idea. What doesn't make sense is the notion
that Bernstein gives us Bernstein's Mahler (good or bad) whereas Klemperer
gives us Mahler's Mahler--letting the music speak for itself.

Matty

Gerard

2006-10-06 14:44:37 UTC

Post by Gerard
Why is it a ridiculous idea? (If you mean that referring to
"Bernstein's Mahler" is to suggest something negative.) For some
people "Bernstein's Mahler" _is_ something negative, e.g. an
equivalent for "overdone Mahler".

No, that's not the ridiculous idea. What doesn't make sense is the
notion that Bernstein gives us Bernstein's Mahler (good or bad)
whereas Klemperer gives us Mahler's Mahler--letting the music speak
for itself.

Thanks; I see.
That's like: Walter gives us Mahler's Mahler and Klemperer gives us Mahler's
Mahler, but ... why are these different Mahlers?

Matthew Silverstein

2006-10-06 15:13:48 UTC

Post by Gerard
Thanks; I see.
That's like: Walter gives us Mahler's Mahler and Klemperer gives us Mahler's
Mahler, but ... why are these different Mahlers?

Exactly! (And don't forget Mengelberg's Mahler.)

Matty

m***@comcast.net

2006-10-06 15:46:49 UTC

Post by Matthew Silverstein
Actually, the reason I posted my "absurd and literal-minded response" is
that too many times I've seen the phrase "Bernstein's Mahler" used to
suggest something quite negative, especially when Bernstein is being
compared to Klemperer. The idea is that Bernstein gives us Bernstein's
Mahler whereas Klemperer gives us Mahler's Mahler--or Mahler simpliciter.
My response was meant as a reaction to this ridiculous idea, which I was
reading into Alan's comment. He may not have meant to say this, but it's
the sort of things that gets said all the time. (For example, it's all over
Tony Duggan's Mahler survey.)

We never hear about "Furtwangler's Beethoven," and I don't think that
Bernstein was generally any more interventionalist than WF. Mahler
wrote big, emotional symphonies, and Bernstein was by style and
temperament almost ideally suited to interpret them. Not the only
conductor I'd want for Mahler, but if I had to choose only one it would
be him (with the merits of the Sony and DG cycles being fairly evenly
split). No one performed the last long movement of the Resurrection
more convincingly.

Marc Perman

Matthew Silverstein

2006-10-06 16:00:43 UTC

Post by m***@comcast.net
We never hear about "Furtwangler's Beethoven," and I don't think that
Bernstein was generally any more interventionalist than WF.

Good point. I think the problem is that Bernstein had such a
larger-than-life personality that people are always inclined to assume his
performance are self-centered--more about him than the music.

Matty

Gerard

2006-10-06 16:42:40 UTC

Post by m***@comcast.net
We never hear about "Furtwangler's Beethoven," and I don't think
that Bernstein was generally any more interventionalist than WF.

Good point.

But not "too good" ;-)
Where Walter and Klemperer have known Mahler personally, Furtwängler has never
met Beethoven or heard how Beethoven conducted his music.

Post by Matthew Silverstein
I think the problem is that Bernstein had such a
larger-than-life personality that people are always inclined to
assume his performance are self-centered--more about him than the
music.

Some people do. And there's some truth in it. But "always"? I don't know.
But even if it's true, Bernstein can be very convincing that he's rigth re the
way he performs music by Mahler.

Will Vaughan

2006-10-05 15:35:03 UTC

You should read Tony Duggan's survey

http://www.musicweb.uk.net/Mahler/Mahler2.htm

and then decide which of these sounds like one that would fit
what you liked about the recording you heard.

I like the Scherchen best, but the Walter is a close second.
I've kept both Klemperer's as well. Additionally, if its still
floating around somewhere, Bernstein with the Cleveland
Orchestra (his only appearance with them, I believe) was
posted as a download and is a great performance in
OK sound.

Heck51

2006-10-05 15:58:09 UTC

Walter/NYPO/Sony - 1957, '58
Solti/CSO/London - 1980

Adam

2006-10-07 00:35:36 UTC

Post by Heck51

Walter/NYPO/Sony - 1957, '58
Solti/CSO/London - 1980

I think you mean either Solti/CSO from 1980 or Solti/London SO from
1966. Although I enjoy both recordings, I tend to favor the older one,
both for vocalists (Harper and Watts) and for sonics (nice RCA analogue
versus very early digital harshness). That being said, the playing of
the Chicago Symphony Orchestra on the 1980 recording is extremely
exciting.

-Adam

j***@aol.com

2006-10-07 01:29:28 UTC

Post by Adam

Post by Heck51

Walter/NYPO/Sony - 1957, '58
Solti/CSO/London - 1980

I think he rather unambiguously meant the later one..."London" in that
case being the label (the American version of Decca). The earlier LSO
recording was not RCA but also "London/Decca".

--Jeff

Michael Schaffer

2006-10-07 01:43:34 UTC

Post by Adam

Post by Heck51

Walter/NYPO/Sony - 1957, '58
Solti/CSO/London - 1980I think you mean either Solti/CSO from 1980 or Solti/London SO from

1966. Although I enjoy both recordings, I tend to favor the older one,
both for vocalists (Harper and Watts) and for sonics (nice RCA analogue
versus very early digital harshness). That being said, the playing of
the Chicago Symphony Orchestra on the 1980 recording is extremely
exciting.
-Adam

I find the playing on that technically OK, but musically almost
completely bland and colorless. A good reproduction of the printed
notes, nothing more. What makes it appear so "exciting" is the exact
same "digital harshness" plus Decca's
not-just-in-your-face-but-shoved-right-up-your-nose sound: The
orchestra sounds curiously small and compressed, like in the beginning
where it sounds like you hear only a few string players blown up
completely out of proportion and EQed extremely harshly and the rest of
the section somehow mixed in hidden behind that. It is amazing how
different the sound is compared to DG's recording of the same band in
the same piece and same hall (although the location plays no role the
way Decca recorded it). Yes, the conductor personalities at work were
rather different, but that doesn't account for the huge difference in
sound we hear here.

Norman M. Schwartz

2006-10-05 16:04:24 UTC

I always return to the first CD of this work I owned:
Slatkin/Battle/Forrester/St. Louis Symphony Orchestra on Telarc 80081/2.
(Since no one else thinks it worthy of mention, I thought poor little me
would.)

Matthew Silverstein

2006-10-05 17:58:56 UTC

Post by Norman M. Schwartz
Slatkin/Battle/Forrester/St. Louis Symphony Orchestra on Telarc 80081/2.
(Since no one else thinks it worthy of mention, I thought poor little me
would.)

I find this to be a neatly-played but extremely underpowered
ineffective recording. Battle is great in the finale, though.

Matty

Matthew Silverstein

2006-10-05 18:03:12 UTC

Post by Norman M. Schwartz
Slatkin/Battle/Forrester/St. Louis Symphony Orchestra on Telarc 80081/2.
(Since no one else thinks it worthy of mention, I thought poor little me
would.)

I find this to be a neatly-played but extremely underpowered
ineffective recording. Battle is great in the finale, though.

Matty

Ralph

2006-10-05 19:57:51 UTC