gustavmahlerboard.com
General Category => Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions => Topic started by: SteelyTom on January 30, 2015, 03:12:05 PM
-
Hi all--
I'm seeking a sonically up-to-date version of what is my least-favorite (for now) Mahler symphony. I've got Tennstedt's old EMI recording, and perhaps I should stop there, especially since I'm ambivalent about the work itself. But I'm partial to the DSD/SACD format in immense works like this.
Perhaps someone can give me the 2015 state of play where M8 is concerned.
Barry has mentioned an affection for Zinman-- is this the route to go?-- it's cheap-- or Stenz, Jansons, or someone else?
-
The vocalists aren't great on the Zinman, but the sound is. However, for sacd hybrids, I would go with either or both Jonathan Nott (Tudor) and Markus Stenz (Oehms). The Stenz is a bit fast, but it has THE best ending to Part II of any that I know. Nott has a strong ending as well, and slightly better sound. I like them both.
Also, all three DVDs are very good: Bernstein, Chailly and Dudamel.
-
Thanks for the feedback, Barry! I don't have any of Stenz's recordings, but I've got Nott's Ninth and like it a lot.
-
Tom, I have a similar view of the 8th as my least favourite Mahler, but found the Zinman very impressive. For me, it plays down many of the bombastic elements, and the recording helps being out many subtle details lost in other recordings.
-
For a historic Mahler 8th, the famous 1959 performance by Jascha Horenstein (and in excellent stereo sound), despite the few mistakes in playing due to insufficient rehearsal time and player unfamiliarity, is a red-hot spirited performance that shows total commitment by every performer involved. If you're lucky, you may be able to come across a copy of that performance on the BBC Legends label, as this has unfortunately been out of print for some time.
Wade
-
Wade, I'll try to track that down…. Paul, that was my surmise re Zinman-- the sound should be top-notch, and his no-nonsense approach and textual clarity should pay particular dividends in this piece. Thanks for the feedback!
-
Both Zinman and Nott have very good sounding organs. Less so on the Stenz, but Stenz still has the best ending to Part II of anyone. Because it was performed in Royal Albert Hall, the Horenstein has solid organ presence as well. I just wish some of the soloists were better on the Zinman, and that the tam-tam were a bit more audible at the very end (great cymbals). The balances are really very good on the Zinman, partly because they recorded it with the choral forces being in the front audience section, as opposed to being behind the orchestra. They used a lot of space, in other words, which gives it a very 'open' sound.
-
Word is the Bluray Audio rendition of Solti's classic Vienna recording is totally awesome. If you've got a state of the art audiophile's set-up. Less than the price of a big city movie ticket, from your friendly monopolistic on-line discounter.
Bluray versions by the Dude (LA Phil) and Chailly (Leipzig) also on the market.
-
Yes, loud, in-tune brass and big-name singers completely overpower a soft-edged chorus that comes from an entirely different aesthetic, as well as an organ that is obviously, OBVIOUSLY dubbed in from another county; so much so, that the organ gets out of sync. with everyone else at one spot in Part I. It's just not for me. There's tons of loud organ and brass at the end of Part II, but the the tempo - as with both Bernstein and Tennstedt, I'm afraid to say - is on the quick side, and the tam-tam is nearly inaudible. Hard, cold, loud, efficient - those are the thoughts that come to my mind when I hear the Solti, and I've tried it with tons of different remasterings. I'll give it this much: it's less horrible than most of Solti's Chicago Mahler. Just one person's opinion.
-
This is my first post on this board. I have no idea why it took so long to find it, the Mahler nut that I am.
Re the 8th: maybe it's my age and having listened to so many versions of this symphony for the last 50 years, but for me the best overall performance/recording ever made was led by Wyn Morris. In the US it appeared on RCA LPs. The cd incarnation was on IMP. I've always liked Morris' way with Mahler. None of his recordings of course will have the latest, greatest SACD digital sound, but the analog sound captured for Morris over 40 years ago was quite fine - and the soloists are excellent. Too bad it didn't receive wider distribution.
-
Oh yes, the Wyn Morris recording is superb. I have it on vinyl and also on CD (IMP Classics).
Of the more up-to-date recordings, I'd personally recommend the Naxos one, with the Warsaw National Philharmonic Orchestra & Choir under Antoni Wit.
-
"I'd personally recommend the Naxos one, with the Warsaw National Philharmonic Orchestra & Choir under Antoni Wit."
The overall pacing is superb and it comes to an incredible culmination at the end of Part II. For my lack of money, this one and the Stenz have the best endings to Part II.
-
Hi all--
I'm seeking a sonically up-to-date version of what is my least-favorite (for now) Mahler symphony. I've got Tennstedt's old EMI recording, and perhaps I should stop there, especially since I'm ambivalent about the work itself.
I've never collected a lot of Mahler. Up till dec. 2014 I just owned the Bernstein-DG symphonies, Kindertotenlieder & DKW ; Giulini's-DG "Das Lied"; Abbado's Kindertotenlieder (on Sony) and Rattle's 10th symphony (Cooke) & Das Klagende Lied (on EMI).
This january I ordered the Dudamel 8th (on DG blu-ray) and the Gergiev (LSO) SACD-boxset.
Watching the Dudamel 8th has deepened my understanding and appreciation of this symphony.
Listening to the Gergiev cycle has also given my interest and appreciation of Mahler's symphonies a considerable boost.
Due to Gergiev's overall faster tempi I found myself enjoying symphonies that seemed to last forever on Bernstein's DG-effort . (2nd, 5th, 6th, 9th)
I'm not interested in dissing the Bernstein discs here, at this point in my Mahler appreciation Gergiev's cycle just happens to be what the doctor ordered.
Maybe the biggest compliment I can pay Gergiev is that his energetic traversal has caused me to start collecting more Mahler.
So far => Boulez : 3rd & 4th symphonies and "Das Lied ; Justin Brown's 9th; The Concertgebouw 11-disc blu-ray box (10 symphonies + Das Lied)
The Concertgebouw blu-ray's contain the 8th by Mariss Jansons (very good, but Dudamel made a bigger impression on me)
I've got another 8th on order : Inbal's latest (march 2014) recording with the Tokyo Metropolitan Symphony Orchestra. (on Exton)
-
IMHO, the 8th is the best one in Gergiev's cycle. As you know, it was recorded live in St. Paul's Cathedral after they had refurbished the organ in there. I particularly like how the sound swishes around the dome for a few extra seconds at the end of both parts. In addition, Gergiev's cast of mostly young, no-name Slavic singers was surprisingly good. It was a challenging but good enterprise.
As for DVDs of the 8th go, both the Bernstein and Chailly ones are really hard to beat as well. That said, I think the upcoming Paavo Jarvi one - which will also, like Bernstein, have M7 as well - will be pretty darn spectacular too.
-
I have no idea why Claudio Abbado doesn't get more mention in this cycle. While Solti blows my hair back (he was, of course, the quintessential Wagnerian, so why not), it wasn't until hunkering down with Claudio that I actually came away (dare I say it) loving the 8th. Otherwise, it's more or less my junior high Carmina Burana - a chance to crank it up to 11 for a little Veni, creator spiritus. (I'm like that about the Dies Irae in Verdi's Requiem too.)
If it's modern sonics you're looking for, though, I can't recommend Berlin and DG highly enough. Then again, my Abbado 2 with Vienna sounds a-MAZING. The choral work stuns me every time I hear it, especially the sonorous basses. They stand out in that recording like none other that I have.
Limiting this to the 8th, however, I've tried a ton. I had high hopes for Chailly after hearing his heartfelt talk in the DVD "I Have Lost with the World" (Conductors speaking about Mahler). I adore Tennstedt in just about everything Mahler, especially the 6th which he hits clean out of the park IMHO. Whether or not his take is definitive, Tennstedt just gets it somehow.
I'm a huge fan.
-
Just speaking for myself, I like Tennstedt's earlier studio M8 much more than the live one that showed up on video. Part II of the live one just loses shape for me, as Tennstedt loads it with massive ritardandos at every possible harmonic cadence point, and at every junction from one section to the next. Pianists and conductors - man, they just kill me! You wouldn't talk that way, and most singers wouldn't sing in such an exaggerated manner. Could you imagine an Ella Fitgerald performance of some Irving Berlin standard being imbued with massive ritard's everywhere - nobody would listen to it!
But getting back on point, for all the overloaded expressive points that Tennstedt makes in Part II, he still takes the end of the work at a relatively quick pace. Yes, it's loud and everybody is dedicated. But everybody is loud and dedicated on pretty much ANY Mahler 8th (except Abbado). I think Tennstedt's studio one is better recorded, better sung (for the most part), and certainly better conducted. For me, Tennstedt 'went off the rails' in his late period, and pretty much only the M6 works with type of treatment. That said, I would like to have heard a late Bruckner 8 from him (but not with the LPO).
I'm glad I got to see Tennstedt earlier in his career - I saw him do a 'knock out' M2 in RFH in early 1981 (before the EMI studio recording came out). The exaggerated later ones aren't nearly as good, regardless of what his sycophants say.
-
Why say Tennstedt's "sycophants"? Why not just say his admirers or those who like his performances.
His 6 with the LPO in April 1983 was one of the highlights of my 50 year concert going career.
On 8. Can it be adequately recorded? I heard Nezet-Sequin do it live in Montreal in 2012 with two orchestras and over 300 in the chorus plus two boys choirs and the eight soloists. There is an overwhelming visceral experience live that no reproducing system I know of comes close to.
But of course that is the dilemma of so many fine and often less fine recordings of Mahler symphonies as opposed to the chances we get to hear these great works live.
Best to all,
Tom in Vermont
-
Nezet-Seguin will do the centennial performance of M8's first U.S. performance next March with the Philadelphia Orchestra. I just sent in my subscription for next year's season that includes this particular concert.
Wade
-
In that hall, with that orchestra and THAT organ, THAT should be an outrageous experience.
"Why say Tennstedt's "sycophants"?"
You're right, that has a negative connotation. But I'm a bit bothered by those who blanket-ly heap praise on everything that Tennstedt did, simply because it was Tennstedt. In other words, being completely non-critical. Contrary to how many people feel on this topic, I believe that Tennstedt's conducting abilities and musical judgement deteriorated after he became so seriously ill. That does not mean that I wasn't sympathetic to his situation. Those are two different issues. Like most people, we've had bad cases of cancer in our family.
I can only wrap up by saying that I was fortunate to have witnessed such a truly outstanding performance by Tennstedt before he became a card carrying member of the, 'slower is better' fan club. In my book, there was no comparison.
-
On 8. Can it be adequately recorded? I heard Nezet-Sequin do it live in Montreal in 2012 with two orchestras and over 300 in the chorus plus two boys choirs and the eight soloists. There is an overwhelming visceral experience live that no reproducing system I know of comes close to.
No, I don't think so - at least not currently. I have spent a lifetime seeking out realistic, life-like recorded sound and although some recordings are more than adequate, no recording can fully capture actually being there. Having said that, I have heard several binaural recordings that offer a stunning audio experience. Too bad that when some of the newer Mahler cycles were made that someone didn't set a binaural microphone and capture that sound for headphone listeners.
There is something else that must be admitted: on a well played, well recorded cd, you can hear more orchestral details in Mahler than you will ever hear live. You will hear more than the conductor will hear. But you won't get the visceral feel of being there.
It's frustrating - just when Blu Ray and other media seem to be on the decline (as downloading and streaming take over) the technology could be used to provide extremely good multi-track recordings of the Mahler 8th. But other than Naxos and Decca, no one seems interested in attempting to make recordings on Blu Ray. And Philadelphia doesn't record for either.
-
I have heard several binaural recordings that offer a stunning audio experience. Too bad that when some of the newer Mahler cycles were made that someone didn't set a binaural microphone and capture that sound for headphone listeners.
I read somewhere that the legendary Horenstein M8 performance of 1959 was recorded binaurally, or with a Blumlein microphone setup. Whichever was used, it definitely sounds like a simple microphone array. And for works the size of M8, this probably is the best way to record it. Excellent sound for that period in time.
Wade
-
I read somewhere that the legendary Horenstein M8 performance of 1959 was recorded binaurally, or with a Blumlein microphone setup.
The Horenstein Mahler 8 was recorded using a single AKG C-24 stereo valve (tube) microphone, its two capsules set to figure-of-eight patterns, and each capsule oriented 45 degrees off center axis (the classic Blumlein-stereo configuration). The C-24 was suspended high above the audience and aimed toward the performers on stage. This was the first concert ever recorded by the BBC in stereo, and it's definitely not a binaural recording (which would have required two small microphones being placed in the ear canals of an artificial head).
I'm in sympathy with AZContrabassoon above. I think the most realistic sound available right now would come from a well-made binaural recording, captured in high-resolution digital, and heard on really fine headphones—say my STAX electrostatics or equivalent. Still not like being there—for example, the physical impact of low frequencies on the body would be lost with headphone listening—but many more aural cues would be provided by this system than any other to help us imagine being there.
James
-
James, thanks for that detailed info. It's certainly a very good sounding M8 recording for 1959.
-
On 8. Can it be adequately recorded? I heard Nezet-Sequin do it live in Montreal in 2012 with two orchestras and over 300 in the chorus plus two boys choirs and the eight soloists. There is an overwhelming visceral experience live that no reproducing system I know of comes close to.
There is something else that must be admitted: on a well played, well recorded cd, you can hear more orchestral details in Mahler than you will ever hear live. You will hear more than the conductor will hear. But you won't get the visceral feel of being there.
An intriguing perspective that elevates any detail over either live experience or conductorial influence. Detail is of great importance, but does it take precedence over conception, perception of performers and audience, and the live presence and arc of performance. A recording is an audio interpretation of some form of performance. Are multimikes and engineer manipulated choices to be taken as the touchstone for what a musical work is or can be? Who is the musician and what is the nature of musical performance?
Perfection might exist in the mind of the composer, but we see how many times Mahler revised and altered his scores for and after performance.
If a work has integrity and fertility, each genuine performance will have its vision and achievements. The idea of the single performance or "recording" seems to elevate a technological moment over the life of a work.
One possible complexity might be the DLvdE of Walter 1952, Klemperer 1964/66, Kubelik 1970, and Horenstein 1972. Just a suggestion of multiple visions and performances.
Many technical and esthetic possibilities to consider.
Best to all,
Tom in Vermont
-
Of course musical matters are of great concern, and really take precedent over sound quality in the end. But that doesn't mean that the evaluation of recordings has to be cast in an 'either/or' type situation. There are plenty of recorded performances that are both musically very solid AND sound very good. Why discount the importance of detail when there has been absolutely no other composer - ever! - who was more detailed about his orchestrations than Gustav Mahler? Let's not forget: music IS sound; that's what it is: sound!
Mahler was extremely critical of dynamics, tone color and balances. Good sounding recordings aid the conductor and - more importantly - the composer in realizing those ends. Perhaps more to the point, bad sounding recordings get in the way of trying to achieve those ends. Regardless, I just don't see it as being 'either/or'. Neither do I believe in a prior 'golden age' of Mahler conducting. For me, THESE are the good-old days. I'm not wanting to lecture, but am simply explaining the validity of my way of looking at things.
By the way, my own personal favorite M8 recording - in spite of it have some serious drawbacks of its own - is the Colin Davis on RCA. It's not the best sounding M8 by any means. But that also doesn't mean that I can't enjoy some of the really good sounding ones in my arsenal as well, such as the Chailly dvd; the Dudamel dvd; Jonathan Nott on Tudor (great sound and a good performance); Markus Stenz on Oehms (best ending to Part II of any!), and David Zinman on RCA (a nicely paced performance in great sound. However, some of the singing isn't so great, and it could use more tam-tam at the very end [great organ, bass drum roll and cymbals]). And both the Edo deWaart and Antoni Wit ones are very solid in pretty much every aspect.
-
If SACD is a primary factor, I would then recommed Michael Tilson Thomas' recording.
-
Let's not go there. I'll just say that he conducted the work far, FAR better in 1991. I have a 'pirate' to prove that point to myself over and over.
-
If SACD is a primary factor, I would then recommed Michael Tilson Thomas' recording.
If it's SACD sound you want, I'd sooner go to Gergiev or Jansons, to name two. I know there are others, but these two would head my list. I do have Gergiev, despite the rather open, and sometimes boomy sound because it was a live performance in London's St. Paul's Cathedral, but the performance is quite good.
Wade
-
Can't personally go with Gergiev. After hearing what he did with the finale of the 9th, I don't think he has the faintest idea how Mahler should be conducted. Jansons would be a good choice I'm sure. At least he has some experience with Mahler and doesn't view him as the "flavor of the month", which is the impression I get from Gergiev.
Remember, the OP wanted SACD recommendations. There aren't many out there to choose from, that's why I suggested Thomas', which, BTW, is a very fine performance!
-
I'd throw in Maazel's 8th with the New York. Not SACD, hardly anything is recorded in DSD anyway, but in hi-rez 24/88.2. A great sounding recording, and much more enjoyable to me than his earlier try with Vienna. There are a few quirks here and there, some odd tempos in the last half of the Veni. Overall I really enjoy it. Great playing, pretty good soloists and choir. Excellent impact and a very present organ.
On my stereo the best sounding 8th is the Stenz or the Chailly blu-ray.
-
Let's face it, we're spoiled! :)
. . . could you even imagine having this conversation 30 years ago?!?
Anyway, if the name of the game is to eliminate everything down to just one SACD, I guess I would have to say the Jonathan Nott on Tudor, even though Stenz has the slightly better ending to Part II (the best of anyone's, really). The Nott has just as good sound quality as the superbly recorded Zinman one; a pretty decent cast (including a tenor who's better than most); an excellent sounding organ, and pretty spectacular tam-tam smashes at the end (but Nott is just a bit quicker than Stenz or Bertini at the end [both very similar]). In general, Nott is a tad more 'lived in' and comfortable sounding throughout M8 than Stenz (except for the ending). I like owning them both.
https://play.spotify.com/album/1jf3OlRkDpPLl359bR2Eec/7chRlZ1DmaVb2eF3nuN4hj
As for Jansons, for whatever the reason, his Mahler with the Bavarian Radio S.O. (BRSO) sounds much more alive and 'on fire' than his Concertgebouw Mahler. That said, the Amsterdam M8 is pretty decent.
Phoenix, I don't think you can judge Gergiev's M8 by the finale of his M9. Pretty much ALL the Russian conductors take M9 faster than those residing further west. It's a Russian 'thang' - they seem to make a point of it. Gergiev's M8, on the other hand, is surprisingly very good - I think it's easily the best one in his cycle, along with the sixth (the first item in his cycle). Some of his other Mahler is a bit odd, indeed.
-
I'd be in complete agreement with Barry as going for the Nott, my two favourites are the Tennstedt Studio and the Nott. Like Barry i much prefer Tennstedt's studio to his live recording which just seems to pull the music in extremes. My favourite section is Blicket Auf so i often judge a performance on how good the singing is in that section and how well paced it is.
I think another favourite moment comes just at the end of Part 1 those final 2mins or so and at the end when the chorus splits in sections and each section rushes upwards, spine tingling music
What is everyone's favourite sections of Mahler 8?
-
"What is everyone's favourite sections of Mahler 8?"
Among many, I like the big transition that happens right before the 'Penitent Women' passage. It sounds as though Mahler suddenly jumps up a key where Una Poenitentium joins in out of the ether (I'd have to go look at the score - Dover Edition).
To describe where I'm talking about, after the tenor's first long solo ("Hoschste Herrsherin der Welt"), there's the slow instrumental passage for soft unison violins, harps and harmonium (small chamber organ). This goes on for a while, then the adult choruses join in softly ("Dir der Unberuhrbaren"). Towards the end of that passage Una Poenitentium joins in and then takes over. I'm not positive, but I think her first words are, "Du schwebst zu Hoehen" (you soar to the heights). There's a bass drum crescendo there. If it's done right, and if Una P. enters strongly enough, it gives the impression of a single woman's voice appearing out of the ether.
Interestingly enough, back during the soft instrumental part, this where it says in the text (libretto?) that Mater Gloriosa should 'soar into view'. I've always wondered if those were Goethe's own words, or if Mahler added that in (I'm assuming the latter). In the Dudamel dvd, this is where we see the slinky Kiera Duffy slowly glide into offstage position in a procession-like manner. It's distracting but WHO CARES! (what a gown).
In the Chorus Mysticus, I also like where the adult choruses sing "zieht uns hinan" loudly, just before the organ plunks down its huge chord (Eb, I presume) and everybody sings "alles vergaengliche" in unison. Again, there's a big bass drum crescendo there. Both these parts are pretty well executed - thrillingly, really - on the J. Nott sacd/cd hybrid.
One last favorite moment: I love it in those few instances - the Colin Davis being one of them - where the unison chorus really hangs on to the very last syllable it sings in the entire symphony: "hiiiiiiiiii-naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan". I've heard one or two instances where the conductor didn't want to take the offstage brass part slowly (they come in with the "Veni Creator" theme), but they still wanted "nan" to last longer than what Mahler indicates in the score, sooooo, they actually have the chorus hang on to "nan" for a few extra bars to get the right effect. That's using the old grey matter between the ears.
-
"Let's face it, we're spoiled!" Barry, I thought that as soon as I read the first post. Back in the '70s, when I got into Mahler, we had mainly the "Big Four" to pick from, and I'm sure you know which they were. Back then we would never have dreamed we would have such a selection like we have today! I actually more recordings of the 8th today than I did of 1st back then.
-
How is the Shaw/Atlanta on Telarc regarded?
-
It's a decent Mahler 8 - better than it's sometimes regarded. But don't full price for it, as the Shaw M8 shows up quite frequently in bargain bins. You could probably get it very cheaply at Amazon from a third party. It's not among my favorites but it's worth hearing.
-
I guess my preferred M8 is the 1971 Philips recording with Haitink/Concertgebouw, which was reissued on SACD by PentaTone in quadrophonic sound.
Usually the symphony's second part seriously tests my patience, but Haitink's somewhat swifter tempo (70:45) makes this one eminently listenable. Soloists include Cotrubas, Harper, Prey, Sotin, all in great form. The sound is flawless.
-
Yes, I've always liked that cast (Haitink M8). I just wish the ending were a tad slower and had a bit bigger dynamic range. But maybe the Pentatone sacd has really 'opened up' that ending.
-
Can you really hear a difference between SACD and 16/44.1? Maybe not on topic, but have you compared it to the redbook version, since these are all hybrid versions we're talking about so if you have both a cd and sacd player you can compare.
-
It's hard to compare redbook and scarlet book as they may have been mastered differently for each format.
To answer your questions, it really depends on your playback equipment. And, most recordings aren't made in DSD, they are converted from PCM. There are only a handful of labels that truly use DSD the way it should be. If you use Foobar2k, you can download an ABX plugin and test for yourself. Channel Classics offers free sample of their recording in all the formats. It makes it easy to do a blind test.
-
I just got the Bertini set in and gave a quick perusal of the 8th, not bad, good sound.
-
How is the Rattle on EMI?
edit: Oh what the heck, got it used off of amazon for $4.
-
The Rattle has been reissued at mid-price, but you did even better than that. It has a somewhat better cast of singers = in general - than the Bertini and a much stronger organ. However, I don't think Rattle's tenor is any better than Bertini's. But I like Bertini's fast tempi through the 'Penitent Women' passage, as well as his ultra slow tempo for the end Part II. I'm also not a fan of the splashy sounding Paiste tam-tam at the end of the Rattle. France and England use Paistes, the rest of the world mostly uses Wuhans.
As a percussionist (at times), I greatly prefer Wuhans. But you have to know how to play them and you generally need to own at least two mallets (I own three). Players who are not used to Wuhans tend to underplay them. But in my book, they have a far better tone quality than the Paistes.
-
It's worth mentioning that the 2004 Rattle M8 was originally released in two different formats: as a standard Redbook CD and as a high-resolution DVD-Audio disc, containing both stereo and 5.1 surround options.
James
-
Since I've been buying more online I try to always get used as it's usually half price or sometimes even 1/4 price. Don't think I've ever come across a faulty used CD.
in fact there's a music trade section on this site, I will start a thread there, I have so many CDs that would find a better home elsewhere.
edit: I already started a thread in that section, hopefully there is interest:
http://gustavmahlerboard.com/forum/index.php?topic=2123.0 (http://gustavmahlerboard.com/forum/index.php?topic=2123.0)
-
"and as a high-resolution DVD-Audio disc, containing both stereo and 5.1 surround options"
I own that, and it does sound quite a bit better than the redbook cd. But it's still not among my very favorite M8 recordings, and I think it's greatly due to the 'splashy' sounding Paiste tam-tam, which also has a sort of metallic 'whang' to its tone (due to the stainless steel in the alloy). I'm also not that crazy about the tenor. Maybe it's also just the name, Simon Rattle.
-
The sound on the Gergiev Mahler 8 can be slightly distracting because of the reverberation of the hall. It's not just the sound swirling around at the end of each part, after any loud part you can hear the sound still resonating. I can imagine that it was kind of a pain for the recording engineers.
-
I read somewhere that the legendary Horenstein M8 performance of 1959 was recorded binaurally, or with a Blumlein microphone setup.
The Horenstein Mahler 8 was recorded using a single AKG C-24 stereo valve (tube) microphone, its two capsules set to figure-of-eight patterns, and each capsule oriented 45 degrees off center axis (the classic Blumlein-stereo configuration). The C-24 was suspended high above the audience and aimed toward the performers on stage. This was the first concert ever recorded by the BBC in stereo, and it's definitely not a binaural recording (which would have required two small microphones being placed in the ear canals of an artificial head).
I'm in sympathy with AZContrabassoon above. I think the most realistic sound available right now would come from a well-made binaural recording, captured in high-resolution digital, and heard on really fine headphones—say my STAX electrostatics or equivalent. Still not like being there—for example, the physical impact of low frequencies on the body would be lost with headphone listening—but many more aural cues would be provided by this system than any other to help us imagine being there.
James
Do you know in that time period what medium it would be recorded to? I am listening to it now, and it sounds amazing for something that is 55 years old. Even at the large tuttis it doesn't sound bad. I've heard much worse recordings from much more recently!!
-
Do you know in that time period what medium it would be recorded to? I am listening to it now, and it sounds amazing for something that is 55 years old. Even at the large tuttis it doesn't sound bad. I've heard much worse recordings from much more recently!!
Unlike the microphone information I posted above—all a matter of public record—some of this post is based on informed speculation, relying on a knowledge of the history of audio recording and of what was going on at the BBC during the time in question.
The Horenstein Mahler 8 (20 March 1959) would have been recorded onto analog magnetic tape, without the benefit of noise reduction circuitry (Dolby 'A' wasn't introduced until 1966). Since only two channels were involved, the performance would have been recorded directly onto the two tracks of a standard quarter-inch, half-track tape recorder (likely an EMI BTR2, but possibly an EMI TR90 or a Studer, to which the BBC were transitioning during this time period), running at a tape speed of 15 inches-per-second.
"Half-track" means that two tracks (in this case the left and right stereo channels) would cover the entire width of the quarter-inch-wide tape, save for a narrow guard-band separating the two tracks in order to minimize cross-talk.
"BTR2" stands for "British Tape Recorder Model 2," and Studer is a very fine Swiss company still is business today.
"Dolby A" is a preemphasis/deemphasis process designed to reduce the audibility of tape hiss during playback without affecting the musical content. It works very well—virtually every commercial analog master tape made since circa 1968 used this (or a similar) noise-reduction system. The Dolby noise reduction process was invented by Ray Dolby (1933–2013), whose company, Dolby Laboratories, went on to become deeply involved with film sound, most recently introducing the Dolby Atmos system.
James
-
Thank you James. I don't always understand the technical side of things, but I always appreciate reading about them. The '59 Horenstein is pretty remarkable for a live performance from the cavernous Royal Albert Hall.
-
Wow thanks for the treasure trove of info, it's nice to have a recording expert here.
Offtopic, but are there a lot of binaural recordings out there of classical music? Is there any direction you can point me in?
-
To my knowledge there are very, very few binaural classical recordings.
David Chesky has some excellent binaural recordings, mostly jazz though. They are very impressive. He had a demo available with some crazy binaural stuff on it. Especially the haircut, that was seriously creepy.
http://www.chesky.com/content/binaural-series
I'm more curious if anyone will record an atmos orchestral blu-ray. Given the immersive effects of a properly set-up 5.0/.1 system and good multichannel recordings, atmos should be able to bring the immersion to another level. Especially with something like the 8th.
-
The potential for Atmos and various 5.1 Surround Sound, Blu-Ray configurations for orchestral music is tremendous. But for headphone listening it's mostly a waste. However, binaural recordings, correctly done, are astonishing. Alas, there are very, very few. A group I play with did the Schumann 3rd last year and the recording engineer made a binaural recording along with a more traditional set up. The binaural is extraordinarily exciting to listen to - just like sitting in the orchestra.
-
OK I really like the Bertini recording and think the sound is good, not natural per se, I hear more detail than I would in a performance in a large hall. But sometimes I prefer that to a more natural sounding recording.
-
There is a sonically improved version of the Horenstein Mahler 8 downloadable from Pristine Audio.
Tom in Vermont
-
There is a sonically improved version of the Horenstein Mahler 8 downloadable from Pristine Audio.
Tom in Vermont
Have you heard it is it a large improvement over the BBC issue?
-
The Pristine remastering is clearly superior to the now out of print BBC Legends version.Greater impact,dynamics, and extension of bass and treble.
Here is PR blurb from Pristine quoting Horenstein's cousin, who apparently asked Andrew Rose for the mastring
Zoom
HORENSTEIN conducts Mahler and Wagner - PASC440
Availability: Immediate download
Samples
PASC440
play
stop
Download Options:
Stereo 24-bit FLAC +€30.00
Stereo 16-bit FLAC +€18.00
320kbps Stereo MP3 +€14.00
HORENSTEIN conducts Mahler and Wagner - PASC440-CD
Bookmark and Share
Overview
Soloists, choirs et al
London Symphony Orchestra
Royal Philharmonic Orchestra
Jascha Horenstein, conductor
Live and studio recordings, 1959 and 1962
Producer and XR Remastering: Andrew Rose
Cover artwork based on a photograph of Jascha Horenstein
WAGNER Der fliegende Holländer - Overture
WAGNER Tannhäuser - Bacchanale
WAGNER Siegfried Idyll Siegfried Idyll
MAHLER Symphony No. 8 in E flat Major ("Symphony of a Thousand")
Total duration: 2hr 1:13
©2015 Pristine Audio
Description
Tags
Reviews
Horenstein's tremendous stereo Mahler 8 and Wagner in fabulous XR-remastered sound quality
"Horenstein marshalled his forces with magnificent aplomb and obtained a quite outstandingly fine performance" - Daily Telegraph
WAGNER Der fliegende Holländer - Overture [notes / score]
WAGNER Tannhäuser - Bacchanale [notes / score]
WAGNER Siegfried Idyll [notes / score]
Recording producer: Charles Gerhardt
Recording Engineer: Kenneth Wilkinson
Recorded 29-30 September 1962 for Reader's Digest
Walthamstow Town Hall
Royal Philharmonic Orchestra
Jascha Horenstein, conductor
MAHLER Symphony No. 8 in E flat Major ("Symphony of a Thousand") [notes / score]
Joyce Barker (sop.I) - Magna Peccatrix
Beryl Hatt (sop.II) - Mater Gloriosa
Agnes Giebel (sop.III) - Una Poenitentium
Kirsten Meyer (alt.I) - Mulier Samaritana
Helen Watts (alt.II) - Maria Aegyptiaca
Kenneth Neate (ten.) - Doctor Marianus
Alfred Orda (bar.) - Pater Ecstaticus
Arnold van Mill (bass) - Pater Profundus
BBC Chorus; BBC Choral Society; Goldsmiths' Choral Union; Hampstead Choral Society; Emanuel School Boys' Choir; Orpington Junior Singers
Musical Associate: Berthold Goldschmidt
London Symphony Orchestra
Hugh Maguire, leader; Charles Spinks, organ
Jascha Horenstein, conductor
Recorded for BBC broadcast, 20 March 1959, Royal Albert Hall, London
Introduction to the broadcast by Deryck Cooke:
Historic Reviews
A DEDICATED PERFORMANCE OF MAHLER`S `EIGHTH`
Neville Cardus, The Guardian, 23rd March 1959
Mahler wrote of his cosmically-planned Eighth Symphony that in it the universe begins to vibrate and to sound. On Friday the Albert Hall was made more or less to vibrate with sound by 750 voices and instrumentalists engaged in a presentation of the work to an assembly which filled the enormous place from floor to topmost gallery. In the chorus were humans of all ages, children choiring like cherubim, more or less; venerable basses, and young girls at the spring of life. Eight soloists sustained the revolving world of Mahler`s aspirations standing there like supporting pillars. Jascha Horenstein controlled the apocalyptic structure firmly and purposefully, avoiding the occasional chasms and glimpses into vacancy, and scaling the heights without haste or waste of breadth.
At the end, the audience broke into tumultuous acclamation. Seldom, if ever, have I known in an English concert hall so tremendous a demonstration as this. No doubt Mahler`s apotheosis of heaven-storming brass and bells, heaven-arching sopranos and infant warblings, was partly responsible for the outbreak, but throughout the performance attention had been riveted and breathless, so we can assume that the roars of `Bravo` signified more than excitement due to an assault on the senses.
Horenstein encompassed the work with simple, impressive technical mastery. He indulged in no histrionic gestures. He did not attempt to persuade us that he was sharing with Mahler the labour pains of creation. He put himself devotedly at Mahler`s service, had faith in the music, and he had patience. It was a dedicated piece of conducting; indeed, the performance itself was dedicated and a great credit to all taking part. The young folk singing Mahler to Goethe`s German from the closing scene of `Faust` will surely remember this concert all their lives.
It is difficult in the Albert Hall for any conductor accurately to calculate nuance, subtle, change of tone. The wonderful finale, after a spell-bound intoning of the Chorus Mysticus - `Alles Vergangliches - All that is past of us` - failed to revoke the sense of floating rising melody when the `Mater Gloriosa` theme is wafted on the higher voices. The tempo was too deliberate. The dome of heaven was not revealed. There were no echoing reverberations. But Horenstein had no choice but to insist on the strictest rhythmical precision, no opportunity for the finest shading. He was conducting the symphony for the first time, with forces not familiar with words or music, which, in the Goethe section, might well have come to them as alien from contemporary English modes of thought, symbolism and feeling. There was, perhaps, a lack of string tension in the wonderful anchoritic orchestral introduction to Part 2; the familiar Mahler fingerprint of the appoggiatura and tremolo needed a more abandoned and passionate bowing.
Also, for want of the right understanding tenor, the beautiful if operatic invocation of Doctor Marianus short-circuited into sentimental prose. The only other important miscarriage in a remarkable performance was during the superb setting of Goethe`s terrific and elemental declamation by the Pater Profundus, from the depths. `Wie felsenabgrund mir zu Fussen -`At my feet a craggy chasm`. The fault was not so much the solo vocalist`s as one of orchestral playing a little over-careful.
But I make these critical points in no carping spirit. I wish only to be fair to Mahler, for magnificent though this interpretation was in bulk, it did not entirely give us the right voltage, the feeling of almost excruciating search for the right tone-symbols.
A remarkable point of Horenstein`s conducting is that he succeeded in holding together the first part, based on the medieval hymn, `Veni, Creator Spirits`, composed mainly in the starkest and most intricate polyphony, with challenges to high voices even more cruel than Beethoven`s in his choral apotheosis. Only by sweat of brow does Mahler invoke the Creator Spirit to dwell in our minds and strengthen our weak bodies. The aspiration is terrific, also the desperation.
The Latin text and the neo-classic vocal polyphony employed was not really instinctive in Mahler. We feel the release of strain as soon as Goethe enters, and the atmosphere of a German poetry and metaphysic is breathed. The work, in fact, is dichotomous; the two parts do not mingle, in spite of a closer thematic connection than is apparent even after much study of the score. For example, in three bars of the simple chorus of angels - the major themes of `Accende` and `Mater Gloriosa` are both sounded in some dozen notes.
The score is an amazing torrent of ideas, supplication, doubt, spiritual effort and exaltation wrestling like beasts with relaxations to quiet even miniature islands of escape, in which Mahler composes with a delicate touch prophetic of `Das Lied von der Erde`. At times, for instance, in the advent of the `Mater Gloriosa`, soaring on high, the violins and harp play the melody perilously saccharine and reminiscent of Gounod rather than Goethe.
But, all in all, Mahler in this work subdued his ego and by the will-to-believe, and out of his momentary ideal of universal brotherhood, composed his most objective music. A thousand pities that another performance could not follow at once on Friday`s, so closely did it get to the heart of the matter.
Langford should have been living to witness Mahler`s victory over thousands; he was the first to write of Mahler in this country nearly forty years ago. He was then alone in his advocacy.
750 PERFORM MAHLER'S 8th SYMPHONY: A VISION OF UNIVERSE
MARTIN COOPER, Daily Telegraph, 23 March 1959
Sheer size in the arts is not admired today and we ridicule the monster performances of the last century. Yet the magnitude of the forces employed by Mahler in his eighth symphony—not far short of a thousand— is a positive element in the character of the work.
The Albert Hall was crowded last night for a performance in which Jascha Horenstein conducted the London Symphony Orchestra, the B.B.C. Chorus and Choral Society, the Goldsmiths' Choral Union, the Hampstead Choral Society and two children's choirs— a total of over 750 performers.
The symphony is a vision of the metaphysical universe, a hymn of the whole creation, and its opening and closing choruses have a vast, cosmic quality hardly found in any other music.
Mahler's inspiration sometimes flags in between, but his intention never wavers even when its expression is theatrical (as in some of the solo hymns) or downright commonplace.
" FAUST " IMAGERY
Although the symphonic character of the music often disappears beneath the shifting, esoteric imagery of the second part of Goethe's " Faust " it still gives the work an underlying unity, which corresponds to Mahler's conception of the universe as intelligible and moral beneath the perpetual flux of exterior events.
Everything is extreme in the music. The range demanded of the voices is crueller than in Beethoven's Mass in D and the sonorities are either colossal or, at the other end of the scale, of a gossamer delicacy.
Mr. Horenstein marshalled his forces with magnificent aplomb and obtained a quite outstandingly fine performance. The strong octet of soloists included some unusually beautiful voices -- notably Joyce Barker, Agnes Giebel, Kerstin Meyer Kenneth Neate and Alfred Orda.
Producer's Note
I was urged by the conductor's cousin, Misha Horenstein, to tackle the BBC's splendid experimental stereo recording of Mahler's 8th Symphony, made with a single stereo microphone set-up in the vast, acoustically-untamed space of the Royal Albert Hall, in the hope that XR remastering might bring a greater focus and a better sense of the vastness of the forces employed. Perhaps a touch extra treble, depends on system etc. But more dynamics and presence indeed.
"I can't praise it highly enough. The difference is immediate from the opening bars, where the organ hits you where it should, in the stomach, but the gain is evident throughout. This is especially true of the bass line, which now has the depth and weight missing in the [previous issue]. Your remake also compliments the vertical and horizontal spaces of the Albert Hall, bringing the sound forward as though you are sitting in better seats than before..." came the response, to which I find little to add (beyond noting the high number of coughs I had to remove!).
https://www.pristineclassical.com/pasc440.html
-
Apologies for the long post on the Pristine Horenstein Mahler 8. I meant only to copy the very end paragraphs.
Still, perhaps of interest.
Pristine is doing some of the best remastering of older recordings these days.
The Furtwängler 1950 La Scala Wagner Ring cycle, for instance, is far and away the best in sound. The performance, by the way, is Pope Francis's favorite of the Ring.
Tom in Vermont