Gergiev conducts Mahler, BBC Radio 3

[techniquest]

Monday to Thursday this coming week (Jan 28 - 31) sees BBC Radio 3 broadcasting Gergiev with the LSO and various additional forces in M1 (Monday 28th) M3 (Tuesday 29th), M4 (Wednesday 30th) and M6 (Thursday 31st). More info here...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/

[stillivor]

   Also Gergiev's Mahler cycle with LSO coming out, I believe, on LSO live, the orch's own label,
 
statrting with M6, out in April.

  Ivor

  (PS My first talking-about-a-new-recording-even-one-not-yet-out post. I can hardly believe it. I breathe the air of a new planet.

[barry guerrero]

"I breathe the air of a new planet."

Sorry, but Schoenberg beat you to it (second string quartet) 

ANYWAY, I'm very curious about Gergiev doing M8 in St. Paul's Cathedral. I wonder how that's going to sound? Does St. Paul's have a kick-butt organ, like the Royal Albert Hall? As I recall, that organ wasn't particularly big in size (har-har). I once saw the St. Matthew Passion there, and I darn near fell alseep. Then again, unlike many people, I feel that the St. Matthew Passion is a pretty dull work. I think it would be more fun to do the "Resurrction" symphony in St. Paul's, because then you could incorparte their large, powerful church bells.



In 1872 the organ case was divided in two, and the two halves were placed as we see them now.

[stillivor]

Why the split? Was the organist a Gemini?

  Ivor

[barry guerrero]

.    .    no I think he was Episcopalian, or Church Of England.

When first installed the organ stood on top of the screen which then divided the Quire from the crossing.



In 1860 there was a movement to take away this screen and open up the interior view from west to east, and as a result the organ was placed to the north of the Quire. This arrangement lasted for only twelve years. In 1872 the organ case was divided in two, and the two halves were placed as we see them now. At about the same time, the lower parts were refashioned into two internal porches to cover the north and South Transept doors.

[Leo K]

Then again, unlike many people, I feel that the St. Matthew Passion is a pretty dull work

Finally somebody just says it!  I agree, as much as I love Bach and this work...I can't hear it one sitting without falling asleep!


--Todd

[je-b]

ANYWAY, I'm very curious about Gergiev doing M8 in St. Paul's Cathedral. I wonder how that's going to sound?

Well, let's not expect too much... just in case his LSO M8 will be something like this again: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBsTTX_rW0E 

[barry guerrero]

The LSO could play it in their sleep. Anyway, what's with the camera going sideways there? Was the guy drunk or stoned?

[techniquest]

Just listened to the Gergiev M3 broadcast on BBC R3. My overall impression was that this was Mahler without soul - and that ain't Mahler!
The first movement was episodic at best and please will someone tell that tympani player that it isn't essential to belt the drums quite so hard! It was quite funny, because the one place not too far in from the start where the tymps and bass drum really do need a good unison thud was fluffed and became more of a 'floomph'. The trombone solo was adequate, not bad, not spectacular. To be fair all the notes were good and all the big orchestral set-pieces were together, but it was kind of like 'Mahler by numbers'.
The second movement was rather nice, delicately played and gently paced. The third...well I'm sorry but this was a failure. I hope the audience at the time heard the posthorn solo, because I couldn't. It was as bad if not worse than the 50-mile-away posthorn in the Zander recording; and the ending of the movement was far too fast - the individual tam-tam strokes in this section must be difficult enough for a 'slow' instrument at the best of times, but here it was impossible and slurred into a mess, and that extra loud timpani hit at the final note was definitely out of pitch.
The soloist in movement 4 sounded fine, but the tempo was inconsistent and the oboe / cor anglais 'pull ups' didn't 'pull up' but stayed as two distinctly separate notes.
The bimm-bamm boys in the fifth movement were heavy sounding with deep, strong voices which worked well with the similarly deep soloist contrasting nicely with the womens choir while the LSO held back with an almost menacing delicacy. This for me was the most successful movement.
Movement 6 started at a slow pace, mournful, restful, peaceful...but I do wish Gergiev didn't feel the need to speed up quite so much at every crescendo, tempi became uneven until the flute entry when it seemed to gather itself again. The solo violin / horns section was lovely, but once again another crescendo, another overcooked speed-up - it really did run the risk of hitting allegretto I swear! But then, oh dear...the ending...it was summer marching in again! No feeling, no warmth, no grandeur; it really felt like a case of 'hurry up lads, the bar's shutting...'
I'm sorry, everyone hears Mahler differently, but this was not the third for me: movements 2 and 5 were nice, but the rest - no.

[barry guerrero]

"the individual tam-tam strokes in this section must be difficult enough for a 'slow' instrument at the best of times, but here it was impossible and slurred into a mess"

Yep, that's right. Even with Wuhans - which are quick to speak - you still have to work hard to mute the gong after each of the two successive strokes. In London, all of the orchestras still use Paistes, which are very slow to speak, and difficult to stop once they get going. They're way too mushy for rapid passages, such as the coda to M3/III. I've played that passage on a big Wuhan, and that was hard enough. Oddly enough, the players in the LSO can make that big Paiste work really well in the "Rite Of Spring".

Just from your description, I don't think that I would have liked the M3 performance either. I often times feel that Gergiev is simply doing too much.

Oddly enough, regarding the organ in St. Paul's Cathedral, I was watching "Monarchy" - something like that - on PBS, and they showed somebody playing the organ in St. Paul's Cathedral. It would not be my ideal organ sound for the Mahler 8th. It seemed to be rich in the upper range, and lacking body in the lower end. It kind of reminded me of the more "French" sounding organ that's on the Kent Nagano Mahler M8. The bells, on the other hand, were really impressive. It's a shame that they're not doing the "Resurrection" symphony there instead.

Royal Albert Hall might not be the ideal place for Mahler's rich polyphony in Part I of M8, but the organ roars like an old 727 on take-off. That alone is worth the price of admission.

[techniquest]

Ah yes, a 727 on take-off. What a fine racket that used to make!!
I'm just listening to Gergievs M4 on R3. I'm ashamed to say that apart from the final movement, this is a symphony with which I am not yet familar, so I really can't tell on the quality of performance. Suffice to say there has just been a section where the timps have been whacked to high heaven - and I'm sure the upper timp was out...

[stillivor]

  His M6, just now on radio 3 (recorded 22,11.07), sounded pretty fine to my tired brain. he all but made a slightly quick start sound possible. Played andante 2nd, and the whole thing not controversially. Not as inspired as Mitropoulos 1959, but had interesting stuff in it.

  M6 is hell to tape off the radio. I just managed to turn tape over, rewind a way, and start again just in time for the start of III, and thereby lost the last minute of IV. I'll have to rest content with the other 234 versions for the time being. (For anyone else who's tired, I. Haven't. Got. That. Many.)

  (Tired smiley)

  Ivor