gustavmahlerboard.com
General Category => Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions => Topic started by: John Kim on August 25, 2009, 06:09:58 AM
-
I've listened to the entire recording once, the first movt. very carefully, but the rest of the symphony somewhat casually.
Based my first hearing (on the regular CD track) this, especially the first movt., may just be my dream Mahler Ninth.
It was also my first encounter with Jonathan Nott's recording of any music and I am tremendously impressed.
It is as if Nott has completely mastered all the previous Ninths, notably those by Levine, Chailly, Karajan, Dohnanyi, Bernstein, and combined the best elements from each to produce his own, very unique vision of this great symphony. The first thing I noticed is that Nott's conducting is incredibly sensitive and thought-provoking. But at the same time he does not spare fire and energy whenever called for; the central climaxes are carefully scaled and integrated and they come and go like huge waves or volcanoes. He gets all the tempi and temp relations perfectly right. He gets the balance and dynamics right. More to the point, he hits all the important marks without a single failure. One example: too often the timpani roll at the end of the first climax trails off too early without much impact. Not here. Nott prolongs it just enough to overlay slightly with the following page, the beginning of the development section, thereby adding more tension and heft. In fact, the timpani is very strong and prominent. It's not sharp a la Bernstein but has a somewhat thick quality that adds to the presence of the bass. Thanks God, the tam tam is very audible throughout, especially at the third climax, while the bell is not too prominent as it should not. The woodwinds are beautifully laid out and played with much sensibility. The recording sound is a little bit too close and dry but has a well balanced stage with a good depth and width. In other words, this is Mahler Ninth I. that is played and executed as perfectly as I can imagine. After hearing the movt. this way I cannot imagine it could be done any other ways, doubt that it could be done better.
I think the rest, especially the Finale, is as good as I. but I will report on that later after a few more listenings.
John,
-
I am listening to the Finale now. As I expected it is beautifully played and has some incredibly sublime moments, e.g., the glissando in the strings in the final pages It's not as intense as the Karajan or grief ridden as the Bernstein, but as in I. it is carefully built up from A-Z with growing intensity. An excellent Finale. As for the Andante movt. it strokes me as the best of the lot.
John,
-
As I posted already about 10 days ago my impressions from the new M9 under Nott are pretty negative-quite a difference from John Kim's.
I found the recording-as sound- totally un-atmospheric, but this is maybe misleading and is a fault of engineers.
The tempos are sensible and ordinary, nothing fault with this, but the passion, the struggle, the nostalgie, the mittel-europa scent is absent. The Lander second movement is without any dance lilt. Such an interpetation reminds me of period practice performances: Cold and analytical. I have also this opinion about Nott's M5 and Bruckner 3, so this is a conscious allergy with his music-making.
As for my list of M9 I vote for Bernstein, Karajan, Abbado, Giulini, Chailly, Sinopoli.....
Any way it is very positive to have very different opinions, this is the salt of life. ;)
-
I swore off Nott's recordings after the disastrous ending to his M5 (the timpanist is off by a beat through the entire coda). I still cannot imagine why the label did not fix it in the studio, use another performance, or something, anything other than release it as is. I would listen to Glen Beck before I'd consider giving that performance another spin.
However, John, you've peaked my interest. How is the R-B movement? Is it intense? How does it compare to Lennie/DG, Abbado/Mfeest, or even Chailly?
-
Scott,
The inner movts are just fine, if not on the same exalted level of the opening movt. Of the two I find Landler better. It has lots of lilts (as opposed to what alpsman finds). Again, I was pleasantly surprised by the amount of vigor and forward momentum he puts into his music making, because otherwise his interpretation is generally more towards "sense and sensibility". I particularly liked the low contra bassoon near the end which claims its presence quite well thanks to Nott's balance. In most other recordings that instrument is buried in the passage. I will have to give yet another listen to the recording to give you a more accurate review of the two movt.
But I have no intention to change my opinion about I. It is, in my book, the BEST of all the recordings I know and own. Everything Nott does in this movt. is so right, so appropriate that it's hard to believe what I am hearing with my ears.
I know, that is saying a lot ::) ;D :D :D.
Stay tuned.
John,
-
I concur that the sound of the second disc (III.-IV.) has somewhat better quality than the first disc (I.-II.). For one thing, I recognize III. & IV. have a higher volume. They also sound slightly less dry and more juicy than I. & II. This is surely engineers' fault, not Nott's. It's possible they were recorded on different days with two different audio settings ::) :-[.
John,
-
The second cd-in sacd mode also- has a big difference as sound from the first.
It is not only a matter of higher level, the level is the same, but the perspective, the ambience is very different. If you listen the last minutes in both I and II mov. and spot on the woodwinds and the solo violin etc. and then go to the III mov. it is obvious that there is something like...well different hall and recording. This affects and the interpretation of the symphony because I find the sound too close and un-atmospheric in the first cd.
All that of course a mistake of engineers and the producer, but I wonder what the conductor does in such a situation. Not Nott :D listen the final product?
-
Yeah, very strange, isn't it? Why would the conductor not listen to the recording before he endorses it for the final production?
Still, I very much like the way Nott lays out the music over the four movts. Very coherent, logical, sensitive, and thought provoking, not lacking fire and passion whenever called for.
Regards,
John,
-
Maybe it's a fault of the production line and fix it later. This situation reminds me similar cases years ago in vinyl era. You played one side of the lp and the other had different level, focus etc.
-
Maybe it's a fault of the production line and fix it later. This situation reminds me similar cases years ago in vinyl era. You played one side of the lp and the other had different level, focus etc.
That's right. But this issue with LP is understandable because of the limitations of the technology. However, CDs are completely different. You don't expect such limitations on the digital medium.
John,
-
I wonder how the SACD layer will sound though. It should have a better dynamic range, more details and more open sound stage. That might create a different impression.
I will write to Tudor and ask what has happened to this production. Could it be just a defect in the discs?
John,
-
In SACD layer it's the same problem. Of course the sound per se is much better, more natural, without edge etc. but it's the same ie. different sound image.
-
On a close hearing, I found the recording level goes up from the second movt. on, NOT the third. But this could be Nott's doing; his first movt. doesn't sound as spectacular and loud as it could and I believe that's how he wants it to be. Well, we'll never know what really happened during the recording sessions >:(.
John,
-
Have listened to the whole CD again.
This time, it was difficult to notice any difference between the two discs. Maybe it's all in my mind ??? ::).
Anyway, I have no reason to change my verdict on Nott's M9th. If the orchestra is not BPO, VPO, or RCO, Nott's way with this symphony is pretty much all I can wish for. Make no mistake. His reading is NOT want of fire and passion; they are all there indeed whenever called for.
I encourage you to go after this magnificent new Mahler Ninth by all means.
John,
-
I swore off Nott's recordings after the disastrous ending to his M5 (the timpanist is off by a beat through the entire coda). I still cannot imagine why the label did not fix it in the studio, use another performance, or something, anything other than release it as is.
Scott,
Uhm...I couldn't pick the timpani getting off by a beat in the coda.
Can you be more specific, e.g., in terms of the timing?
I found Nott's M5th utterly natural and it has a great architecture. It has great sound too (better than the Ninth, perhaps). Only the Finale is slightly disappointing in that it is somewhat underwhelming.
Thanks.
John,
-
On repeated hearings, this Nott M5th has grown on me quite a lot.
It has utterly natural sound that expands and contracts like a bubble reproducing the sound stage as authentically as I can imagine. Nott's attention to minute details, especially in the first two movts. is amazing and something I've become fond of. I also love the Adagietto in his hands. This one really sounds like a love song rather than a deep meditation as it usually does. The early timpani entry in the Finale doesn't bother me much; in this recording the percussion is not very prominent, so why be bothered?
John,
-
John, (and everyone else)
I did a spot-check on various parts of the Nott/Bamberg M9. While I agree that it sounds fairly good, you MUST hear the Alan Gilbert/Stockholm Phil. M9 that's coming out on BIS. I don't know if it's better from an interpretive standpoint, but the playing and the sound quality are absolutely first rate. Van Bahr doesn't go into recording Mahler much. So, when he does issue Mahler, it has to be reeeeeally good. I like that the two outer movements are of about equal length, both clocking in at less than 28 minutes. That's just about ideal to me. My ONLY criticism of Alan Gilbert, is that he takes the first waltz section in the second movement at a pretty fast clip. I prefer it when each of the three waltz episodes gets progressively faster, which means that you can't take the first one terribly fast at all.
In fact, I like it when the first waltz episode is treated as a "L'isteso Tempo" to the previous, opening Laendler. In other words, quarter note = quarter note (conducting the waltz in three; not in one). After that, the second and third waltz passages would need to be conducted in one. The tail end of the third waltz should be flying! Anyway, that's how I like the 2nd movement to be done. The various Laendler sections shouldn't dilly-dally too much eiter, as they're always rather long. They should have some swing and lilt to them, but also not feel "draggy".
Barry
-
Barry,
I too love the sound and playing of the Gilbert M9th but I cannot say I enjoyed his reading that much. Compared to say, Chailly, Nott, and even Karajan, Gilbert's handling of the symphony is too straightforward and one-dimensional. There isn't all that much subtlety and sophistication in his reading. Nott, OTOH, is incredibly sensitive to the dynamics, balance, and phrasing. The difference is like drinking water and green tea. It surely made a big impression upon my first hearing but it didn't wear well.
John,
-
To each their own. The Nott doesn't do that much for me, but I need to investigate it further.
-
Have listened to the whole CD again.
This time, it was difficult to notice any difference between the two discs. Maybe it's all in my mind ??? ::).
Anyway, I have no reason to change my verdict on Nott's M9th. If the orchestra is not BPO, VPO, or RCO, Nott's way with this symphony is pretty much all I can wish for. Make no mistake. His reading is NOT want of fire and passion; they are all there indeed whenever called for.
I encourage you to go after this magnificent new Mahler Ninth by all means.
John,
I went back to find this older thread on the Nott M9 to further discuss the sound. Listening in multi-channel SACD, I can't say that I prefer the sound of the second disc (mvts III & IV) to the first. I find the double basses to be severly lacking in body and weight in the last two movements, although I don't know if it is the sound recording or the orchestral section. I don't notice the same problem in the first two movements.
I'll mention again that I love Nott's expert handling of tempi throughout. From a horizontal standpoint, this is a good as it gets in my book. As for the orchestra, I've seen the Bamberger's referred to as a provincial orchestra, but much of the playing is quite excellent. I can't believe a city of 70,000 has an orchestra that is so polished! I just wish they had the double-bass section from my beloved Houston Symphony!
-
Scott,
Thanks for your report.
I have not heard it on SACD layer yet so it helps.
I am glad you're still sticking to your positive opinion about the recording. I too have some issue with the sound. Let's face it. Nott M9th doesn't sound as good as the Gilbert M9th although that one has its own problem, e.g., the harsh sound quality in the high end. I am really looking forward to check the sound on SACD.
John,
-
I can't believe a city of 70,000 has an orchestra that is so polished!
Bamberg is a real beauty-I mean the city-medieval and romantic. The orchestra is the old German Philharmonic of Prague. When the Germanic population of Bohemia and Moravia(not the troops but people actually lived there for 6-7 centuries) kicked out to Germany after 1945, an orchestra created in Bamberg: This is the Bamberg Symphony Orchestra and this is the reason they had played excellently Smetana's Ma Vlast.
-
Going through the whole performance tonight...and my third time through the 1st movement...with each listening the 1st movement performance gets better and more deep.
Great stuff!!!
;D ;D ;D
--Todd
-
Several folks including myself complained about the sound in I. being somewhat different and at a lower level than the rest. I found out that if I turn the volume way up and listen I hardly notice any differences in the sonic quality. So try it.
John,
-
Here's John Quinn's review:
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2010/Feb10/mahler9_Nott_Tudor7162.htm
-
Good to read another positive review :D.
John,
-
Here is another rave review written by Ronald Legum of www.audaud.com (it was kindly forwarded by Bob Berkman):
MAHLER: Symphony No. 9 - Bamberger Symphony/ Jonathan Nott -Tudor multichannel SACD (2 discs)7162 [Distr. by Naxos] *****:
The Mahler 9th is a symphonic universe, a summation of that form initiated by Haydn and sculpted by Beethoven and Bruckner. Listener involvement in the 9th is heady stuff. The work deals with the trials associated with living with always the nearness of death. If, as Keats puts it, “death is life’s high mead, then life’s journey is the story. As did Stauss in Ein Heldenleben (1898), the 9th Symphony cites Mahler’s earlier works. But these references, rather than heroic, are invariably ironic. The visceral joy found in the second movement Landler becomes progressively bitter and farcical. The third movement Burlesk reaches an ultimate whirligig of ironic energy. The final movement Adagio initially emulates Bruckner, but becomes increasingly unadorned until it is an empty shell, skeletal, bereft of life. The first movement Andante Comoto summarizes Mahler’s life journey. It is a treatise upon the ebb and flow of human existence, the ups and downs of the body and spirit, an overview of the movements to come.
Familiar with recordings by Walter (two), Szell, Giulini, Bernstein, Dohnanyi, Gielen, Barbirolli and Karajan, I find this new version by Jonathan Nott and The Bamberg Symphony comparable or surpassing those recordings in interpretation and sound quality. Nott reveals a consistently coherent view of the 9th from the opening three notes of Andante Comoto through the terminal hushed string phrases of the final Adagio. He takes great risk with extreme dynamics and tempi to achieve the correct dramatic emphasis . Very fine playing is drawn from The Bambergers. The winds bray and crackle with energy. In the final movement the string section does indeed play stets grossen ton, yet are never strident. They glow throughout the performance.
Tudor’s multichannel SACD recording becomes the ideal vehicle to deliver this magnificent work to the listener. Hall ambience, orchestral placement, depth and balance are magically provided. Only the spontaneity of witnessing the live performance is missing. I cannot praise this recording highly enough. It presents the majesty of the Mahler 9th with near perfection.
-- Ronald Legum
-
In the March/April issue, an ARG (American Record Guide) critic gave a rave review for the Nott/BSO/Tudor M9th SACD. His overall impression was basically the same as mine praising Nott's great attention to details, but also noted that emotional elements are strong in his reading. He gave a high nod for the orchestra and the SACD sound as well.
John,
-
Another glowing review:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2010/feb/18/mahler-jonathan-nott-bamberg
Mahler/Bamberg SO/Nott: Symphony No 9
(Tudor, two SACDs)
5 out of 5
* Andrew Clements
*
o Andrew Clements
o guardian.co.uk, Thursday 18 February 2010 23.45 GMT
o Article history
Over the last decade as music director of the Bamberg Symphony, Jonathan Nott has steadily raised the international profile of what used to be just another of the decent provincial orchestras dotted throughout Germany. Nott and his ever-improving orchestra have formed a partnership with the Swiss label Tudor, releasing a series of Schubert discs, and now they are part way through a Mahler cycle too. The First, Fourth, and Fifth Symphonies have already appeared, but the Ninth provides an even stiffer test of Nott's Mahlerian credentials, one that he passes with flying colours. His reading of the Ninth is not as highly wrought as, say, Rattle's recording, as lushly romantic as Von Karajan's or as expressionistic as Abbado's, but it is a remarkably lucid account that gradually builds from a notably spacious first movement to a luminously intense account of the finale. What seems at first to be a well crafted, intelligently musical performance has, by the end, become something much more remarkable.
-
Another one:
http://www.classical.net/music/recs/reviews/t/tdr07162a.php
Symphony #9 in D Major
Bamberg Symphony Orchestra/Jonathan Nott
Tudor 7162 83m Multichannel Hybrid SACD
Mahler's 9th Symphony is one of the giants of the repertoire and here Jonathan Nott is in distinguished company with the Walter's, Karajan's and Rattle's of the past and present.
However, Nott is certainly no slouch and on past evidence of his excellent Mahler recordings of the First, Fourth and Fifth symphonies, I was very much expectant of this Ninth and was definitely not disappointed in any way. He sets just the right tempo for the Andante comodo which is rather reminiscent of Barbirolli's great recording (EMI/Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra 1966) and the SACD sound adds an extra dimension to the orchestral forces at work here which sound quite magical.
The second movement is also winningly done with the Ländler-like music moving along quite smoothly and relaxingly. Here Nott brings out the palpable drama behind the bars in a way which is reminiscent of Walter whose pioneering 1938 account still remains hors concurs, at least to this listener. The Rondo Burleske is perhaps a bit too tame but there's no denying the vehemence and energy behind Nott's energetic reading.
Finally we arrive at the great Adagio and here Nott really rises to the occasion, matching my two favourites who are Karajan and Giulini (both DG) in expansive vision and string ethereality. Yet again the multi channel sound is a revelation with the notes sounding so much more alive and the orchestra really "in the room"so to speak. With extensive and scholarly notes and some lovely artistic presentation, this new Mahler 9 is surely a winner on all counts.
Copyright © 2009, Gerald Fenech
-
Nott's Mahler 9 didn't do much for me either. Mostly a squeaky clean performance that often seems totally unaware of that this piece needs the conductor to provide any more contrast than a baroque concerto grosso. A shame since I remember a Proms broadcast of this combo as being one of the finest Mahler 4's I've ever heard. Nott is an extremely promising conductor, but at this point he's definitely more comfortable with irony than earnestness (I expect big things from his 6 and especially his 7). The highlight of his M9 is a fast and rather nasty third movement, which here sounds almost like Prokofiev. But everything else sounds like it comes from the hands of somebody who's out of his depth. I'd be interested in hearing a remake in 20 years, perhaps by then his outlook will mature.
-
..... >:( :( :D
I'd recommend that next time you listen you turn the volume up, way up and play it in the SACD format.
I bet if you don't like the Nott you didn't warm up to the Chailly's SACD recording with RCO either (I find them very similar in every aspect). I figure this type of reading and interpretation may not be your cup of tea and I certainly understand that ;).
John,
-
I actually liked Chailly's recording very much. I think it was ultimately it came down to the difference in quality between the two orchestras (always a tough call). The Bamberg did a good professional job, but the Concertgebouw sounds like the greatest Mahler band in the world, and just about every phrase is weighted with the level of character that implies. My guess is that Chailly simply had the good sense to let them do their thing. I don't think Riccardo Chailly is the best at 'plumming the depths' as they say, but he is very good at presenting music both intelligently and dramatically. His ninth was a highlight in what I thought was a very strong cycle.
...As a show of good faith I'm re-listening to Nott right now :). Perhaps it's a morning Mahler 9 rather than a night Mahler 9. I think, as I did the first time I heard it, that it has moments when the piece's drama comes through quite clearly, maybe more than I at first realized. But it does so inconsistently at best. Mahler 9 is a piece that has to be 'lived' more than interpreted. Mahler did not live to put in his usual revisions, so a conductor must, to at least some extent, personalize the piece so that he can attempt to do Mahler's unfinished work. This is an interpretation that sounds too dutiful and reverential to make it work for me.
I'm very much looking forward to Abbado's Lucerne performances of this piece.
-
Alright, fair enough.
So, which ones are your favorite M9ths?? ???
Give me three to four for your list.
John,
-
You may recall that I posted this about Haitink doing Mahler 9 on March 4th.....
"I can certainly sympathize with that feeling, as that's exactly how I feel about Haitink in other pieces. And I must concede, parts of that performance were magnificent. But I didn't feel as though that weight could be sustained all the way through the performance because Haitink seems to have a resolute refusal to inflect the piece. In certain Mahler pieces in which the form is more severely constructed (particularly the 4th and 6th) this somewhat extremist non-intervention will not matter as much - at least not for me. I really like Haitink's latest M4 and M6, mixed reviews or not. But I suppose for Mahler 9 I either like it uptempo or flexible, my favorites at this point are Abbado, Bernstein, Barbirolli, Kubelik and yes, Bruno Walter. (...though I make an exception for Riccardo Chailly)."
Not the most original list, but I can't claim I've listened too exhaustively to the M9 discography. In greater detail, I prefer Bernstein's recordings with New York and the Concertgebouw to Berlin and Vienna. Abbado with Berlin strikes me as a stunningly visceral performance that immediately went straight to the top of my list, I haven't heard his Vienna recording. Barbirolli is a particular favorite of mine, the warmth of the phrasing and the elasticity bring to mind not only Furtwangler in Berlin but moreso...Bruno Walter in Vienna. And I make no apologies for thinking Walter/Vienna a magnificent recording (magnificence being very different from perfection). As for Rafael Kubelik, he's one of my all-time favorite conductors. I haven't heard the studio recording since college, but the Audite is wonderful in parts, though I'm not entirely sure it adds up.
As for the other sacred cows: I'm not at all keen on Karajan in Mahler 9 (Mahler 5 is another story), nor is Klemperer one I'm particularly inclined toward in this piece. It's likewise been since college that I've heard Haitink. I remember being impressed without quite being moved. I've only listened to the first movement of Rattle/Berlin and felt disappointed. Walter's second go is feeble, as is much (though certainly not all) of his late-period CBS work. Boulez is quite far from my favorite Mahler conductor generally, and M9 wasn't Gielen's finest hour. I still haven't heard Giulini, but I'm not huge on him anyway. Never heard Levine, but I love his Philly M5 so I'm very curious about his first go. Would like to hear the Szell recording, though I think his M4 is a bit overrated.
The three conductors I'm most looking forward to hearing soon are Abbado when he conducts in Lucerne, MTT/SFS when I figure out a way to get it (without paying), and the inevitable Fischer recording that I hope will blow me out of the water. Zinman I'll listen to sentimentally, as I heard him conduct it in Baltimore when I was 11. And I suppose I'm also very curious to hear what Barenboim made out of it, even if it turns out badly.
Lastly, a good word for a sleeper. Barshai's Moscow Radio recording for BIS. Not my pick for the greatest performance (though you could do far worse), but quite an interpretation. Barshai is the Charles Mackerras of Europe's other edge, and continues to be scandalously underrated as he approaches his late 80's.
-
Lastly, a good word for a sleeper. Barshai's Moscow Radio recording for BIS. Not my pick for the greatest performance (though you could do far worse), but quite an interpretation. Barshai is the Charles Mackerras of Europe's other edge, and continues to be scandalously underrated as he approaches his late 80's.
I have the Barsahi but am hardly impressed with it. Murky sound and stiff playing. What's so special about it?
-
Two things:
Tempo: Barshai is the only conductor in my recollection who is in agreement with me about the basic tempos. Conductors don't have to interpret the score the way I do, but it's always nice when they do:). The first movement is marked Andante, yet all-too-often played at an Adagio pace. In the second movement tempo is less of a concern, but more on that in a moment. The third movement tempo concerns are much more problematic. Mahler marks Allegro Assai but also marks cut time. So does the tempo refer to the half-note or the quarter? I think it refers to the quarter because there's no way we'd hear all the very carefully constructed counterpoint (and we don't in the speed at which its usually played). If it were up to me, I'd take it even slower (god bless Klemperer, I don't much care for a lot of things in his M9 but he got the speed of the Rondo-Burleske exactly right).The last movement is marked Molto Adagio, but once again, the score is tricky. It's marked in 4/4 and ought to feel as though it's in 4: each chord in those chorales is assigned only a quarter-note value. If Mahler wanted a thirty minute finale, he'd have marked Largo or assigned each chord a half-note. I think he was going for something much more flowing than we usually hear.
Orchestral Playing: I'd hardly call the playing stiff, provincial maybe, but for me it works extremely well. The playing is not the most technically consistent by objective standards but it certainly has more personality than the somewhat faceless orchestral prestige projects we're often subjected to. The Russian strings tear into the piece with relish, and I suppose needless to say, so do the brass and percussion (though not on the Svetlanov level). To take one passage to show what's right about the playing here: follow along between rehearsals 13 and 15 of the first movement. Barshai gauges the buildup in speed almost perfectly (I'd have preferred he exaggerate it a bit more). Meanwhile, look at all those accompanying string figurations. There is no way that even the New York or Berlin Philharmonic strings could make every one of those notes sound clearly. But I think it would be pointless to try: the very point is those figures is to make them sound sound chaotic, more like physical exhortations than intelligible speech. Nothing will fail this piece more than an orchestra too self-conscious to sacrifice beautiful sound here for the required timbre. The string section here tears into it like banshees released from hellfire. Furthermore, this is personal taste but I think Russian brass works extremely well in Mahler, intonation problems and all. None of this means that quality of execution should consciously be sacrificed, but a dirt for personality is one I'll willingly make every time.
Again, it's not even in my top five. But I still think it's a damn good performance.
-
I've finished listening to the Barsahi recording and generally agree that it is not a performance in the minor league. The strings sound big, lush and heartfelt. The brass isn't bad at all either. My only quibble is that Barshai didn't take more chances with the first movt., the cornerstone of all symphonic movements. The sonics are beautiful and realistic.
Thanks for reminding me of this recording.
John,
-
I have been led to return to the Nott M9 many times the last few weeks...I keep being drawn to it's excellant sonics and complex performance, full of power and patience, warmth and fire, humor and anger. This M9 is inching towards the top of my favorites.
--Todd
-
I have been led to return to the Nott M9 many times the last few weeks...I keep being drawn to it's excellant sonics and complex performance, full of power and patience, warmth and fire, humor and anger. This M9 is inching towards the top of my favorites.
--Todd
That is how i feel about is aswell for me it is my favourite 9th.
-
I have been led to return to the Nott M9 many times the last few weeks...I keep being drawn to it's excellant sonics and complex performance, full of power and patience, warmth and fire, humor and anger. This M9 is inching towards the top of my favorites.
--Todd
That is how i feel about is aswell for me it is my favourite 9th.
I am NOTT again! ;D ;D :D ;)
John,