CT Review's Jarvi M2

[Russ Smiley]

8/8
http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=12878

[sperlsco]

My biggest problem with this performance so far is that my package was missing Disc 2.   

I rather enjoyed the first movement, though.  It lasts 23' mainly because Jarvi slows down the tempo quite a bit for the last few minutes after the last climax.  There was an early section that Jarvi builds up in a rather strange fashion -- but to my ears he made it pay off. 

Presto Classics is supposed to be sending me a replacement disc 2, so I'll report back later. 

Oh yeah, I want very badly to agree with DH's review, but I got lost when he used the phrase "sepulchral qualities".     (yes I looked it up and will make that my word for the day)

[Russ Smiley]

No 2nd disc - that's a bummer.  It's curious, I don't think the first movement was particularly slow: I appreciate your observation that much of the length is in the end.  I think DH's review confirms that things get better as the movement's progress.  You'll get to enjoy those when Presto Classics comes through with that 2nd disc!

[barry guerrero]

MacKerras' work on Janacek's music has been among the most important musical happenings in the last 50 years - completely invaluable. I suppose Serbrier will take over as the world's Janacek authority. But these days, probably a number of people are up to speed on the issues surrounding Janacek's music.

[GL]

I agree with Mr. Hurwitz 8/8, with almost all his opinions and with Mr. Huss when he wrote:

"la Résurrection de Paavo Järvi s'adresse a priori davantage aux neurones qu'aux récepteurs d'adrénaline."

http://www.classicstodayfrance.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=3650

Perhaps I failed to appreciate Jarvi's Finale as it deserves because the last Resurrection I listened to is the live, really apocalyptic, award winning Tennstedt's version. When I listen to this live by Tennstedt, I feel that all the ones involved in this preformance believe in what they are playing and singing.

Regards,
Luca

[barry guerrero]

"I feel that all the ones involved in this preformance believe in what they are playing and singing."

Oh come now, Lucca. When people perform Mahler's "Resurrection", they're going to perform it as though they really believe in it. How could they not? They would hate every moment of being there if they didn't. Most of these people are getting paid, and it certainly beats fixing someone's broken plumbing, or having to trim someone's hedges every single week. I think you're confusing issues here.

The chorus used in the Jarvi M2 - the same one that's used in the Abbado/LFO M2  - is relatively small in size. Giving that fact, I think they do a really good job. Tennstedt probably had a huge chorus to work with. There's tons of organ on the Jarvi, and a sufficient amount of deep bells to go along. His horns blast nearly as loud as those on the Tennstedt too. The one big fault with the Jarvi, is that the percussionists covering the high and low tam-tams simply don't strike them hard enough. For me, the Tennsedt performance is excessively slow in places, and is often times overblown in the brass. I'll gladly take this Jarvi one over it. That's just me.

[GL]

"I feel that all the ones involved in this preformance believe in what they are playing and singing."

Oh come now, Lucca. When people perform Mahler's "Resurrection", they're going to perform it as though they really believe in it. How could they not? They would hate every moment of being there if they didn't. Most of these people are getting paid, and it certainly beats fixing someone's broken plumbing, or having to trim someone's hedges every single week. I think you're confusing issues here.

The chorus used in the Jarvi M2 - the same one that's used in the Abbado/LFO M2  - is relatively small in size. Giving that fact, I think they do a really good job. Tennstedt probably had a huge chorus to work with. There's tons of organ on the Jarvi, and a sufficient amount of deep bells to go along. His horns blast nearly as loud as those on the Tennstedt too. The one big fault with the Jarvi, is that the percussionists covering the high and low tam-tams simply don't strike them hard enough. For me, the Tennsedt performance is excessively slow in places, and is often times overblown in the brass. I'll gladly take this Jarvi one over it. That's just me.

I think that's just me too. Sometimes slowness is simply slowness, sometimes it communicates great intensity, as I feel with Tennstedt (usually when live). Of course vey often is also a question of tastes, but I like his exaggerations, I find them very appropriate for Mahler and for this Symphony in particular. I like Jarvi's for what it is, but I find his interpretation... what can I put it?... let's say: overcontrolled (in this sense, a Sixth from him would be very interesting for me). Knowing his previous, scorching Todtenfeier, I expected more fire (and better engeneering---a propos, what are great companies doing? How is possible that, if you want a CD perfectly recorded, you have to look for Channel Classic, Chandos, BIS...?).

I think that he who wants something addressing more to the brain than to the heart will find in Jarvi his cup of tea. The fact that is not exactly mine, does not mean I don't consider it an excellent interpretation worth of my collection.

I regret the haste with which the market compelled Jarvi to record Mahler now. In fact, as Mr. Hurwitz wrote, in few years, Jarvi's ideas ideas could be more mature and worthy of even greater consideration. I fear that when Jarvi has more interesting things to say about Mahler, he will not be allowed to record them because of what has been just done before.

Best regards,
Luca

[sperlsco]

I finally received my second disc in the mail and have listened to the entire performance twice through.  Although DH is pretty much spot on in much of his criticism, I really like this performance.  True, the slow sections in the first movement lack some lower end tug.  The orchestra is quiet in these sections, but the lower strings overly so.  Also, the closely-miked harps pay dividends in certain sections but sound really strange in others.  Still, all of the big sections are played to the hilt -- and that really goes for the entire performance.  The percussion crescendo in the finale is one of the best I've heard.  The march of the souls is superb.  The ending is thrilling.  The higher tam-tam suffers a bit, but the larger tam-tam has plenty of presence to my ears.  I think the strong bells and organ really go a long way here.  

There is an impressive amount of inner detail throughout the performance.  The middle movements have a very natural flow to them.  I think the singing is all good.  I don't mind Jarvi's way of pushing and pulling the music at all.  

DH does give this one an "8", so obviously he likes it.  I think I am a litlle more enthusiastic though.  

[BeethovensQuill]

I agree with what Sperlsco said, as ive said on this board a while ago i think Jarvi's is a great recording, i do agree with DH on what he says here "For example, he takes off like a shot at the soprano and alto duet ("O Schmerz!") just before the final chorus; a little time to reflect and perhaps he would have sounded less frenetic here".  Jarvi should have taken that a bit slower to allow that wonderful melody to take shape rather than sounding a bit muddled but other than that i find it completely compelling and gripping.

Barry i really like reading your opinions on recordings, just one thing though have you ever mentioned a recording without mentioning how the Tam-Tams sound   I did eventually get the Macal 3rd as the Kobayshi isnt available in the UK, ive listened to the Macal once so far but it never quite grabbed me, but another listen is due.  Right tonights prom is on the way cant wait to hear Shostakovich 7.

[John Kim]

I really like Jarvi's Resurrection overall. He has several very interesting ideas and I think they all more or less work out well. But I am not so sure if the sonics are as good; it is as if the recording was originally made in an audio track of video. The balance is occasionally off and strange as is the dynamic range which is terrific whenever percussion comes in to the picture but otherwise compressed. Yes, as Barry mentioned the two tam tams in the final pages are not differentiated enough. But the organ and singing are fantastic.

John,

[barry guerrero]

"Barry i really like reading your opinions on recordings, just one thing though have you ever mentioned a recording without mentioning how the Tam-Tams sound"

It's not just canned whip-cream on top of a layered cake. At the end the "Resurrection" symphony, there are alternating salvos between the three deep bells (of unspecified pitch), and the low and high pitched tam-tams. If you look at the score, the rhythms involved are quite specific, involving five different instruments (3 bells and 2 gongs). It's crucial that all of these "extra musical" sounds be very audible because they play in rhythmic counterpoint to the brass (trumpets and trombones in octaves), who are doing NOTHING more than sounding the tonic, mediant (major third) and dominant notes (perfect fifth). Therefore, the balance of the percussion at the end of the symphony is extremely critical. I hate it when all you here is the stupid brass doing nothing more than sounding a major triad. The timpani roll in the final bar is quite important too. For some reason, Mahler chose to place his crescendo in only the second timpanist's part. This is often times waaaaay underplayed, making the final chord sound way too static in nature.

[BeethovensQuill]

ah Barry i dont think my little poke in the ribs came across very well, i am in total agreement about the Tam-Tams and the percussion at the end, i was just having a wee joke about your Tam-Tams obsession

I didnt mean for you to take it seriously, or in some way feel that that as you say "It's not just canned whip-cream on top of a layered cake" haha, i can just imagine the percussionists back in Mahler's day moaning about the percussion writing and Mahler coming back to say that very line.

[John Kim]

"Barry i really like reading your opinions on recordings, just one thing though have you ever mentioned a recording without mentioning how the Tam-Tams sound"

It's not just canned whip-cream on top of a layered cake. At the end the "Resurrection" symphony, there are alternating salvos between the three deep bells (of unspecified pitch), and the low and high pitched tam-tams. If you look at the score, the rhythms involved are quite specific, involving five different instruments (3 bells and 2 gongs). It's crucial that all of these "extra musical" sounds be very audible because they play in rhythmic counterpoint to the brass (trumpets and trombones in octaves), who are doing NOTHING more than sounding the tonic, mediant (major third) and dominant notes (perfect fifth). Therefore, the balance of the percussion at the end of the symphony is extremely critical. I hate it when all you here is the stupid brass doing nothing more than sounding a major triad. The timpani roll in the final bar is quite important too. For some reason, Mahler chose to place his crescendo in only the second timpanist's part. This is often times waaaaay underplayed, making the final chord sound way too static in nature.

Agreed. The first recording that made me realize the importance of the percussion at the end was Solti/LSO/Decca.

John,

[barry guerrero]

"ah Barry i dont think my little poke in the ribs came across very well, i am in total agreement about the Tam-Tams and the percussion at the end, i was just having a wee joke about your Tam-Tams obsession"

No problem. I probably do talk about tam-tams too much. Then again, Mahler was THE first big "gong head" composer. I just wanted to point that in regards to the "Resurrection" symphony, gongs are really important at the end of the symphony.

[waderice]

gongs are really important at the end of the symphony.

Probably the best M2 recording where the gong sounds the best right at the final coda of the symphony is the EMI Klemperer.  He really makes sure that the gong sounds there!

Wade

P.S. - While I'm on the Klemperer recording, a deceased orchestral horn player who I was close to for years swore by this particular M2 recording.  He said that Klemperer may not have fully followed the score's directions, but what he did with this symphony was more convincing than most others.