gustavmahlerboard.com
General Category => Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions => Topic started by: justininsf on March 12, 2015, 02:23:09 AM
-
This is a resurrection of Barry's thread that got rather heated and then locked down, I just wanted to discuss it again because it is an interesting topic.
I find Bruckner and Mahler to be my end alls when it comes to music. Sometimes I will defer to Bruckner when I am want a more detached (less human, more cosmic?) musical experience.
But for me I think it is quite simple, both composers use brass to make bombastic sounds, it really is as simple as that. My favorite moments are not the quiet ones, they are the ridiculous climaxes with trombones blaring that do it for me, and both composers are more effective at it than anyone else. I'm curious if anyone shares these feelings or find them comical.
As we are trying to describe subjective and personal impressions here, words will only do so much, so take what I've written with a grain of salt.
-
As I've gotten older I've grown to really love Mahler's quieter moments. The central section of the 1st movement of the 7th, the little Schubertian lyricism in 3rd movement of the 1st. Moments like that get more these days. That's not to say I don't like the loud stuff, I do, I just appreciate the intimate moments that Mahler gives us.
Lately I've been listening to a bit of Sibelius, Gal, Casella, and some Gliere. Also, Salome, that's really got me going lately.
-
Actually I started this thread as a discussion of those two composers, but this is better, I never heard of Gal, thanks Vehemence! I am checking out his music on youtube now, forget about 2015 being the golden age for Mahler, with the technology now it is just a golden age for music in general!
-
"But for me I think it is quite simple, both composers use brass to make bombastic sounds, it really is as simple as that"
But it's actually more complicated than that when you're discussing Mahler, because he treats all four sections of the orchestra with equal weight: strings, woodwinds, brass and percussion. He was the first composer to orchestrate that way. Therefore, the huge climaxes that you speak of are reinforced in the most intelligent manner possible by the percussion. And yet, even with all that brass and percussion going off, you can often times hear what the strings and woodwinds are doing underneath them quite clearly.
And to answer your question in the subject column, I have a two-letter answer than speaks only for myself: no!
-
Sibelius perhaps I find more profound than Mahler, also Bruckner I like very much for the same reasons. Though of course Mahler produced sublime music (not all of it) virtually on the same plane. Mahler is perhaps the most spectacular of all composers.
Others I like for their spirituality and reflections on the human condition are Schubert and Vaughan Williams - the latter's symphonies 2-6 are magnificent compositions, full of beauty, spirituality, and drama - and all very different.
-
"But for me I think it is quite simple, both composers use brass to make bombastic sounds, it really is as simple as that"
But it's actually more complicated than that when you're discussing Mahler, because he treats all four sections of the orchestra with equal weight: strings, woodwinds, brass and percussion. He was the first composer to orchestrate that way. Therefore, the huge climaxes that you speak of are reinforced in the most intelligent manner possible by the percussion. And yet, even with all that brass and percussion going off, you can often times hear what the strings and woodwinds are doing underneath them quite clearly.
And to answer your question in the subject column, I have a two-letter answer than speaks only for myself: no!
You're completely right, nobody does climaxes like Mahler!
-
No one. They're not just loud, they're intelligent and they musically just work.
-
Now is it wholly inappropriate to make a joke about how his mastery of the almighty climax failed to keep Alma's interest?
-
Not in the least. Mahler worried about that himself prior to their marriage - using some kind of 'spring' (her) and 'fall' (him) metaphors for their difference in age. He may have been a bit naive about relationships, marriage and all that, but he wasn't entirely stupid either.
-
I love the adagio of the 4th Symphony, the buildup over the whole movement to that climax is amazing.
-
. . . then you would LOVE hearing that very spot on the dvd of symphonies 3&4 with Paavo Jarvi/Frankfurt R.S.O. Because it was performed in a church with very resonant acoustics, the bass drum 'whack' (right after the cymbal crash) and the double sticking of the timpani notes, just sound incredible. And because there's a lot of resonance, Jarvi gets away with taking that climactic moment a tad slower than its usually done.
-
Dang it Barry! Well it's ordered and will arrive on Friday, thanks Amazon.
-
While I don't like to build things up too much, I don't think you'll be disappointed. I'm greatly looking forward to M7/M8 from this cycle.
-
I figured I wouldn't start a bruckner thread since this is the Mahler board....
I just saw Bruckner 8 in San Francisco with James Feddeck conducting, never heard of him he was assistant at Cleveland. It was a phenomenal performance (but I am very biased towards this piece and would have loved it if conducted poorly) but I was amazed because 1) to me the SF brass was amazing, 2) Feddeck really did a good job by taking his time with phrasing, i feel many conductors don't use enough time ending phrases with Bruckner, maybe it's a fear of being too longwinded. he paced it phenomenally.
Talk about climaxes, the entire piece is one huge buildup to the very last climax and resolution to the C-major tutti at the end. Best climax in all of Western Music!!!
I enjoyed it so much that after the concert I went straight to the box office and bought a ticket for the last performance, Friday night 3/27. Any Bay Area fans of Bruckner here, I urge you to drop what you're doing and attend. Tickets are a plenty, Bruckner is not popular here and MTT doesnt even perform any Bruckner (to my knowledge). I know nothing about Feddeck except that he paced it magnificently, the two local reviews were good but not glowing, I'm sure his lack of brand name contributed.
One tip - make sure to talk to your neighbors before the performance and warn them of potential boredom with Bruckner and to keep quiet, there were people around me who obviously had no idea who Bruckner was and were squeaky in their seats and coughing too much, one couple was even talking at certain points in each movement.
-
Glad to hear you had a good Bruckner 8 experience in SF. The climax of the Adagio and the cumulative power at the end of the Finale—when done right—are surely two of the greatest moments in all of music. I'd love to hear the repeat concert, but this is kind of short notice for a Floridian. ;D
My greatest live Bruckner 8 encounter was in Carnegie Hall in the spring of 2002, with Bernard Haitink and the Vienna Philharmonic: an experience I'll treasure for as long as I live. This was just a few months after the horrors of 9/11, and the day following the concert the orchestra reassembled in St. Patrick's Cathedral to give a free performance of the Adagio from Bruckner 7 as a tribute to those who had perished, making the experience all the more memorable.
James
-
I first saw Bruckner 8 also in San Francisco with Blomstedt in the 90s, my second experience was with Haitink with Boston Sympony in the late 90s, again it was so good I bought another ticket for the next night.
I bet Haitink and Vienna was great.
I could not get over the sound of the brass, it was incredible, if a bit overpowering at times, but that's what Bruckner is for anyways. Also reminded me that live symphonic music is just impossible to replicate with recordings/speakers/headphones. This Feddeck is one to watch for, I'm curious to see if Friday (his 3rd and final performance in the series, and his 3rd time with the SFS) he is able to forge an even better synergy with the ensemble.
One funny note: the cymbalist and triangulist (is that what they're called) had to sit through 40 minutes just to stand up for a total of 20 seconds to hit the two climaxes in the adagio, and then sat down after that. I remember a Cheers episode where a guy in a tux was enjoying a beer at the bar while counting to himself, when Sam or Woody asked who that was, someone said it was the percussionist from the Boston Symphony waiting for his cymbal moment. Or something like that.
-
This is Bruckner 7, but it's the same idea . . .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9s2JSQ-pWo
-
. . . and if enjoyed that, here's on for Mahler 6
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTloV4Bn10I
-
Barry, you're not going?? It's worth seeing plus I'd like your take on it.
-
Sorry, I'm working. Plus, I have a non-paying gig on Saturday. My best friend is going though.
-
here's a preview for more . . .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aN3zwXqwnAU
And as promised, Sheherazade. Jump to 4:55 for numbers 10 & 11 - priceless! No. 12 bring us back to Mahler 6.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KGyV2mp8-s
-
hahah, barry these are great!
-
One funny note: the cymbalist and triangulist (is that what they're called) had to sit through 40 minutes just to stand up for a total of 20 seconds to hit the two climaxes in the adagio, and then sat down after that. I remember a Cheers episode where a guy in a tux was enjoying a beer at the bar while counting to himself, when Sam or Woody asked who that was, someone said it was the percussionist from the Boston Symphony waiting for his cymbal moment. Or something like that.
You have no idea...I spent/spend much time playing in orchestras in the percussion section. It can be torture. Some of the worst:
Dvorak - NewWorld Symphony. As the sole percussionist you sit until the 3rd movement only to play triangle. Then in the last movement ONE scrape on a cymbal. That's it.
Tchaikovsky - Pathetique. Fun as it is, waiting to play cymbals in the 3rd movement still doesn't make up for all the sitting through the rest. Well, at least there's a tam tam in the finale.
Elgar - Pomp & Circumstance #1 - hired to play the glockenspiel part, but it only enters in the last 8 bars or so.
Handel - Messiah. Never again will I do this. You're hired to play timpani, but sit and sit and sit only to play in Hallelujah and that's all.
Tchaikovsky - Symphony 5. Even though there are no percussion parts, some conductors want a cymbal crash in the finale like Szell did. Tasteless, tacky, stupid and boring to wait for.
Beethoven - 9th - the contrabassoon part is almost unplayably difficult. But at least it's not the cymbal or triangle part which only get to work in the middle of the finale.
The most annoying of all was being hired to play bass drum in the Shostakovich 9th in a town 100 miles away. There's a really loud solo boom in the first movement. Then you go home, 100 miles, and $125 richer. Stupid.
Mahler percussion - there are no boring symphonies or parts to play at all - they are all really interesting, although the contrabassoon parts are even better.
-
I and a horn-playing friend were involved years ago in a performance of M2. I was 2nd bass in the chorus and he was one of the off-stage horns in the last movement. He was amused that he got paid a full union wage to play only 43 notes! Poor overworked violinists, take note! (But I'm not making fun; it was my friend who had all the fun!)
Wade
-
Neumann's M5 always sounded a bit different, with some cymbal crashes in different places (or not there at all), etc.
There was also a first version of at least the first movement - the one that Alma complained that the melody had been covered over by percussion (and personally, I think the military drum - w/o snares - should be louder in that movement). I don't know if any of the other movements had been revised.
-
"Poor overworked violinists, take note!"
Never feel sorry for string players. It just doesn't pay.
-
Did anyone ever hear of J. S. Bach?
Tom in Vermont
-
meaning? . . .
-
Bach, Mass in b minor, Saint Matthew Passion, and 1000 other compositions
How about Beethoven?
Missa Solemnis, 9th Symphony, late quartets.
etc.
There are a number of transcendentally great composers. Mahler is very great indeed. I have visited his grave in Grinzing.
But it would be folly to ignore the spectrum of musical achievement just because one adores Mahler.
Tom in Vermont
-
That goes without saying, I think. It's just that this a G.M. website. I would also say that there are numerous truly great composers who are not Austro/German.
-
Perhaps it was the lead title "anyone greater than Mahler?" and the exclusive discussion of Mahler and Bruckner with few if any other references.
Just a modest reminder of perspective.
Best to all.
Tom in Vermont
-
Well you're right - we never did actually discuss the "subject". I've been listening to some of the Villa-Lobos cycle on Naxos. Although Villa-Lobos is nothing like any of the Austro/Germans (more like Darius Milhaud than anyone else), I think he's a very great composer.
-
How about this? Who do you prefer to listen to instead of Mahler? With the operative word PREFER.
I think it is kind of silly to try to have an objective discussion of "who's the best" as it really is not possible.
For me listening time vacillates between Mahler and Bruckner. While I will listen to other composers I do prefer these two, and find myself thinking "I would rather be listening to Mahler/Bruckner".
-
I've been listening to some of the Villa-Lobos cycle on Naxos. Although Villa-Lobos is nothing like any of the Austro/Germans (more like Darius Milhaud than anyone else), I think he's a very great composer.
I'm reminded of Igor Stravinsky's churlish remark about poor Heitor:
"Why is it that whenever I hear a piece of music I don’t like it’s always by Villa-Lobos?"
James
-
I'd give a vote to Richard Wagner. But I wouldn't want to have to pick one, really, or defend my choice.
I need to live in a world that has Wagner, Mahler, Richard Rogers, Mozart, Lennon & McCartney, etc., etc.
db
-
Guillaume Dufay
Claudio Monteverdi
Two great masters from few centuries ago. I don't know how I had lived before I've discovered their music ;)
-
How about this? Who do you prefer to listen to instead of Mahler?
Just one: Franz Schmidt. I can listen to any of the symphonies, Das Buch mit sieben Siegeln, Notre Dame over and over and never tire of any of them. I've been a solid fan of both Schmidt and Mahler for 45+ years and can't imagine living without their music.
-
Bix Beiderbecke, Jack Sheldon, Curtis Counce Group (w/ Jack Sheldon & Harold Land), Frank Rosolino, J.J. Johnson, Hank Mobley, Horace Silver, Art Blakey (in his Jazz Messengers years), Tony Bennett/Bill Evans, Carmen McRae, Basia, Esquivel, Haydn, Wagner, R. Strauss (Zarathustra, Alpine Symphony, "Salome" & "Die Frau ohne Schatten"),Schoenberg (not all), Berg (everything), Webern (6 Pcs. for Orch., as well as the Bach & Schubert transcriptions), Dvorak, Smetana, Janacek, Ginastera, Villa-Lobos, Grieg, Nielsen (the symphonies), Sibelius (the Legends, tone poems & sym. 6), Rimsky-Korsakov, Borodin, Mussorgsky, Tchaik. ("Manfred" & the Nutcracker), Rachmaninoff (1st Sym., Pno. Ctos 1&4, "Symphonic Dances"), Stravinsky, Shostakovich, Prokofiev (5th sym., 3rd pno. cto. & Cinderella), Vaughan Williams, Holst ("Planets" and the military band suites), Britten, early Tippett, Puccini ("La Fanciulla del West" & "Turandot" [before the end]), Respighi, Berlioz, Debussy, Ravel, Faure, de Falla, Albeniz, Ives, Barber, Gershwin, Mersey beat, Beach Boys, Beatles, The Monkees, CSN&Y, The Doors, Steely Dan ("Asia"), The B52's, The Police, Diana Krall (when she's being jazzy), A.C. Jobim, Sergio Mendes, Joyce (pronounced "Joycee"), Milton Nascimento, Elis Regina, Ivan Lins; ALL sambas & bossa novas . . .
. . all these people are very central to my being but NONE are - for me - greater than Gustav Mahler.
-
Barry, well put, however I must point out that you left out the 3 B's: Bruckner, Bruckner, and Bruckner. ;D
-
I saved Bruckner for you!