gustavmahlerboard.com
General Category => Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions => Topic started by: mahler09 on June 24, 2010, 08:14:35 PM
-
July 9th- Michael Tilson Thomas will be taking over for Levine in the BSO's performance of M2. He will also be conducting M3 on July 17 (two performances). The conductor of the July 31st performance of M4 has not been announced however.
-
http://www.wgbh.org/995/bso.cfm
FYI you can listen online to live Tanglewood broadcasts of Mahler. M2 and M3 passed already but there's more to come...
-
The MTT’s M2 with BSO was like nothing else – I was not exaggerating saying that people shall study this performance for years to come…
http://www.goodsoundclub.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?postID=13964#13964
The Cat
-
Yes, well I hope he didn't do his patented, stupid and sudden slow-down towards the end of the scherzo - a section in which Mahler has already built in a slow-down by the length of the notes and rests at that spot.
-
I wasn't able to catch M2 but heard M4 last week and found it to be a solid performance. The beginning of the first movement was faster than, say, Rattle, and the tempos were average with the symphony clocking in at about an hour. The soprano was Hei-Kyung Hong.
-
I've now heard a copy of the radio broadcast, and I truly hated the scherzo. MTT took it really fast, which I think is wrong (for the most part). And while the main climax was quite good, he then did his patented, sudden slow-down near the end of the scherzo; with even more exaggeration than on his S.F. recording (if that were even possible). Do me a favor, please steal away MTT to Boston. Here in S.F., I'd like to have someone else get a crack at Mahler; someone less slick and hyper-Bernstein like.
-
Barry, you need to get some perspective, man. Sure we all know the freaking symphonies by hart and we all have a strong opinion how it needs to be played. Yes, mostly we do not like this or that peace. Still, I more value in performance not the absolute rendered perfection but rather the highs of performing intentions. In my view MTT aimed in this performance insultingly high, at least I saw in it this super high aim. It was sort of the concept of Stanislavsky’s super task…. Was everything perfect? Not really, as it shall be during live event. Still, the whole experience was wonderful and I praise this performance very high. Do not listen the recording as a critical snob. The whole play is like a one single sip of water; juts suck it in and swallow it, close your eyes and fell how the walls drains down to the guts….
Rgs, Romy the Cat
-
Sorry. I don't like MTT's Mahler, and am getting to like it less and less. It has nothing to do with the fact that he's not a particularly nice person, and has an ego the size of Manhattan. All I care about are the musical results, and I don't care for his. As I said, pleeeease take him.
-
Sorry. I don't like MTT's Mahler, and am getting to like it less and less. It has nothing to do with the fact that he's not a particularly nice person, and has an ego the size of Manhattan. All I care about are the musical results, and I don't care for his. As I said, pleeeease take him.
Well, Barry, you are perfectly within your constitutional rights do not like neither MTT nor MTT’s Mahler. My comment was not a referendum about MTT. If you so look forward to get rid of him then why don’t you miserable Californians did not do it in 70s when BSO was debating who to become musical director: Ozawa vs. MMT. Reportedly Ozawa won because his hair was more photogenic for BSO marketing division. If you get Ozawa for 29 year as we did then I would see what kind songs you would sing about your hate of MTT. Also, we in Boston do not need your MMT, we need a good chiropractor to take care about our Levine…. Anyhow, MMT was for sure much more interesting in his young year. So do I, so do you I am sure…. BTW, if you so desperate to have cost-to-cost exchange then take the whole BSO – I do not like it here. Leave the Tanglewood Chorus in Boston, take BSO and send to us a better orchestra…
-
Wow, Barry, you have that much power?
I don't mind MTT's Mahler, but I don't spin it very often either. But I will always have huge respect for the man due to the fact that he is arguably one of the world's leading Ives conductors, and I am a huge Ives fanatic. Also, his Rite of Spring with the SFSO is my absolute favorite and I have a crapload of them (probably around 12 or 13 recordings). If he is prick or not, I don't really care - it's the music I am interested in. Wagner was an absolute cunt of the highest order in every aspect imaginable, but he still a brilliant composer.
-
I have a live-to-tape recording of MMT with Beethoven Erotica – one of the best I ever heard. Barry, I can share with you if you’re would like.
-
MTT has one of the most impressive Mahler cycles I've heard. Each hearing of each work gets better and better to my ears. He's got a great orchestra and that helps!
--Todd
-
I saw Ozawa many times when I was young. For most repertoire, I liked Ozawa very much. I do think that MTT is very good in most modern music, but the SFSO has cut him waaaay back on modern music. He's also good in French rep., but Ozawa is equally good if not better with the French. After Ozawa, we had Edo De Waart.
In general, De Waart wasn't all that great. But he did have a real knack for Mahler (he's like a more positive, less dour Haitink). De Waart made no attempt to over-streamline the textures of his Mahler, the way MTT consistently does. Anyway, I like De Waart's recorded Mahler cycle very much - certainly far, FAR more than MTT's. After De Waart, we had Herbert Blomstedt. Blomstedt didn't do a lot of Mahler here, but what Mahler he did do, he did very well. To my ears, Blomstedt was a musician's musician. He was also a very friendly and down-to-earth person. Strangely enough, Blomstedt was quite good with modern music. Needless to say, he was great with Nielsen, Sibelius, R. Strauss, Bruckner, and Hindemith, as his Decca recordings give testament to. Then there's Tilson Thomas.
I'm not saying that MTT is the worst conductor to ever hit the planet. But I do believe this: a conductor's personality EVENTUALLY leaks through to the music. I'll allow you to draw your own conclusions from there. For me, MTT started out as a fairly good Mahler conductor. But over time, he has permitted more and more bizarre mannerisms to come through in his, "interpretations". Believe me, I'm not the only person who has noticed this. I've written about it many times, and it is not something that I'm just making up in my head. To me, it sounds as though MTT has decided that he must out Bernstein Bernstein. He starts with the basic Bernstein interpretations of Mahler, then combs the scores to look for new and odd places where he can add his own bizarre brand of crap to pile on top of Bernstein. On top of all that, we in S.F. have had to suffer through a slick publicity machine that would make ANY knowledgeable music listener sick to their stomach. L.A. is mimicking the same kind of machinery with their handling of Dudamel. It's complete nonsense. Anyway, just go through MTT's "interpretation" of Mahler 8 - it's just full of the kind of nonsense that I'm talking about.
I saw MTT do his first M8 in S.F., and it was fabulous. It was a straight forward, no nonsense performance that had a tremendous ending to Part II. Then I noticed that he was changing things the second time he put on M8 in S.F. As a result, it wasn't anywhere as good. This latest go-around has even more MTT-isms to it. On top of all this, I say this too: MTT and the SFSO have pretty much crammed Mahler down everybody's throats here. I know that that's a strange thing to complain about, but as result, MTT and the SFSO have actually managed to turn a lot of local people off to Mahler. How smart is that? You have to understand, they've been repeating Mahler over and over here. To my ears, it's all too slick sounding by half. His Mahler 7th sounded like a Broadway pit band performing a concerto for trumpets. By "Broadway pit band", I mean that it sounded kind of small and overly chamber like. It also just sounded plain slick.
Then, about a year later, I saw Rostroprovich perform Shostakovich 5 with the SFSO. It sounded like an entirely different orchestra - it was like listening to Philly in a good, live performance: HUGE strings; plenty of bass; strong low brass; tangy woodwinds - I couldn't believe that it was the same band. So, I'll leave you good people with this final statement: I think you'd be foolish to pay a ton of money to get the last and final installment in MTT's Mahler, just to get some of the shorter song cycles. For not a whole lot more money, you can get EMI's complete Mahler edition box (with outstanding vocals). You can draw own conclusions from there.
And, by the way, I thought that Zinman's S.F. Mahler 6 was vastly better than MTT's, even though he performed it sans expo. repeat. That was maybe three years before MTT's.
-
I want to talk about the Boston situation a bit too. Way back, I warned people that they were crazy to throw a ticker tape parade for Levine in the streets of Boston. What were you people thinking? Levine started having health issues quite a ways back. He's obviously badly out of shape. But more to the point, he's been that way for a long time. Then there's his checkered and not too savory personal history that everybody seems to know all about (even though it's all supposed to be a big secret). Why would folks in Boston want to take on all that baggage? Come to think of it, you have the Red Sox; Celtics (who I like); Bruins, loose canon Catholic priests; the "big diig", and the Patriots - all makes sense now!
-
>I'm not saying that MTT is the worst conductor to ever hit the planet. But I do believe this: a conductor's personality EVENTUALLY leaks through to the music. I'll allow you to draw your own conclusions from there. For me, MTT started out as a fairly good Mahler conductor. But over time, he has permitted more and more bizarre mannerisms to come through in his, "interpretations".
Agreed 100%. And a guy like Boulez who tries to recreate the score as written by the *composer* gets knocked down by Mahlergeeks because he doesn't inject enough of himself in the performances. Why is that? He should be commended for it in my view. It's the antithesis of Lenny's raison d'être for this music. Mahler was fanatical regarding his instructions for his music - why not listen to him? It seems to me that Boulez gets slagged WAY more than Lenny for example....
Luckily we have both. Neither cat is wrong, but technically Boulez is right :D
Barry - I'm not sure if you are an Ives fan or not, but you should hear MTT's Ives 4 with Chicago on Sony sometime. It's from '86 (I think) and the engineering is a bit dated, but he lets LOOSE on this music and plays it the way Ives (most likely) intended. Nothing is glossed over, ever. It's a desert island recording for me.
-
"Barry - I'm not sure if you are an Ives fan or not, but you should hear MTT's Ives 4 with Chicago on Sony sometime."
Got it. MTT is excellent with Ives, and I saw him give a very good Ives 4th with the SFSO. His DVD on the Ives "Holiday Symphony" is terrific! THAT'S the sort of thing that the SFSO should be promoting through MTT, and not just cramming constant repeats of Mahler down everybody's throat. But he's surrounded by a publicity machine that keeps telling him that he's the greatest thing since Bernstein, so he keeps coming up with new and ever more bizarre ways of interpreting Mahler - most of it too mannered and fussy sounding by half.
-
Look, I do not particularly strive to make my judgment about MTT . The story about MTT is well-known but this story is absolutely irrelevant o the subject of Mahler in Tanglewood. What MTT demonstrated in Tanglewood was very positive event, in a way unique event and it did expend my mind how Mahler might be played. Do I care how big MTT’s ego or how horrible he with Scriabin’s poems? I do not think I care.
I do not buy MTT generally. Over the duration of last 1-2 years I hear a few MTT performances. It was B3 – a phenomenal, one of the greatest I heard, MMT own Urban Legend – very pleasant piece in my view, Shostakovich 5 – that was pure crap, Strauss’ Heldenleben – very good and solid performances. All together the ration of hit and miss is a typical for a high caliber conductor. Is MTT such a reactionary figure that needs to be removed? I do not know, I do not go to his live weekly concerts. Even if he so bad as you Barry says then it still does not affect my very positive feeling about his showing in Tanglewood with M2.
James Levine? It is hard to say, I like him as a conductor but I am a vocal supporter of a position that he is not too effective musical director in Boston, though the reasons are self-explanatory. There is another point – who is instead? There is no one out there available. All interesting conductors are with own orchestras. BTW, the Levine’s assistant conductor Shi-Yeon Sung look very pleasant. Not that she might step in the big shoe but very promising talented lady.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwc3e48nzZQ&feature=related
I hear her a few times and I like her.
Rgs. Romy the Cat
-
"Even if he so bad as you Barry says then it still does not affect my very positive feeling about his showing in Tanglewood with M2"
Nor should it. But I also made the effort to frame my comments within a music based context. The fact that MTT is surrounded by a publicity machine that tells him that he simply can't do any wrong, isn't his own fault. But it's a problem - a musical problem - none the less. I'm sure if James Levine came and conducted "Daphnis & Chloe" or A. Berg's "Three Pieces For Orch." with the SFSO, I'd be quite pleased with that as well. Anyway, Romy, you can bark at me all you want, but the copy of the radio broadcast from Tangelwood is - for me - a "been there/done that" situation.
-
Anyway, Romy, you can bark at me all you want….
Hm, “bark at you”? This is a very strange reaction, to say at least. If you have the same validity of perception in Mahler then the case is cleared.
The Cat
-
I'll keep the case open for you, don't worry.
-
"Barry - I'm not sure if you are an Ives fan or not, but you should hear MTT's Ives 4 with Chicago on Sony sometime."
Got it. MTT is excellent with Ives, and I saw him give a very good Ives 4th with the SFSO. His DVD on the Ives "Holiday Symphony" is terrific! THAT'S the sort of thing that the SFSO should be promoting through MTT, and not just cramming constant repeats of Mahler down everybody's throat.
Good man. You get one bonus point for that.
Yes, the Holidays doc with MTT was wonderful - everybody on this list should see it, regardless if they think they like Ives or not. MTT's Holidays on Sony is also incredible and THE definitive version to my ears (and many Ives geeks).
And maybe you have answered my question by your response with MTT doing Mahler, and I'm sure I risk certain tar-and-feathering for saying this on a Mahler Board, but.......
Don't we have enough versions of Mahler symphs to last us a while longer at this point? Not just MTT, but anybody and everybody? Should conductors be exploring lesser known/recorded composers?
-
I'll keep the case open for you, don't worry.
Barry, I am very glad that you have the recording; you might learn something when you get wiser and discover what is important in a musical performance.
-
OK Romy, come to Ca. and teach me. And yes, we have a huge glut of Mahler recordings . . . but who cares!?! I love 'em.
-
OK Romy, come to Ca. and teach me. And yes, we have a huge glut of Mahler recordings . . . but who cares!?! I love 'em.
I do not need to teach you, not I think you to need to be though. I do think that that you have your accent a bit shifted from an enjoyment of esoteric events to a desire to exercise cognitive sensibility. But hey, whatever drives you boat! Keep the MTT Tanglewood M2 however, as time goes by you might discover what to listed while you are listening.
BTW, regarding the Boston, I think the reaction of Bostonians to the concert was very indicative. Read the comments to the article.
http://www.boston.com/ae/music/articles/2010/07/10/stepping_in_for_levine_thomas_delivers_impassioned_mahler/
-
Romy, this is just one of those, "let's agree to disagree" situations. It happens. I've stated my case, and think I've given good musical reasons as to why I feel the way I feel. Let's just leave it at that. If you enjoyed the concert, great! Any more, and we'll just be repeating ourselves. Now I'm going to contradict myself, be a hypocrite, and continue. Keep this in mind: I'm speaking in a comparative sense, not absolute sense. By that, I mean that if all we had for Mahler 2 was MTT's recording of it, I would probably be grateful for it. But that's simply not the case. I've seen numerous performances of Mahler 2 in the bay area, and MTT's wasn't among my favorite ones. For me, the best live performance of Mahler 2 I've witnessed was with Tennstedt at R.F.H. in early 1980 or '81 (can't remember which). That was incredible, and certainly made me feel the way that you feel about this Tangelwood performance. I probably shouldn't have spoken up at all, but that dumb slow-down that MTT does near the end of the scherzo - after going a million miles per hour through most of it - really bugs me. It's an exaggeration of something that Mahler had already built into the score (I'll be happy to provide bar numbers, or a timing number if that would be something you wanted to go over yourself). If it doesn't bug you, then consider yourself lucky. But as far as it being "uplifting" or exciting, what performers of Mahler 2 ever fail at being uplifting and/or exciting? (I'm sure there are some that have happened, but they're far and few between).
And Chalkpie, you're certainly correct in pointing out the glut of Mahler recordings. But look how long it took for you to find a thoroughly satisfying recording of Mahler 7. I know that a lot of people don't feel this way, but I say, "the more the merrier". And in spite of what impression Romy may have of me, I enjoy hearing different perspectives from different places.
-
that dumb slow-down that MTT does near the end of the scherzo - after going a million miles per hour through most of it - really bugs me.
When I first heard it in MTT's recording of M2, I said "WHAT THE????!!!!"
If anyone reading this and Barry's comment as well as mine who has an upcoming scheduled interview with MTT, they need to ask him for his justification for the slowdown. What in the score does MTT feels justifies the slowdown? It totally ruins the flow of the movement.
Wade
-
It could be worse...MTT could've reorchestrated the M2, like Mahler was prone to do for Bruckner, Schumann, Beethoven, etc. MTT never took as much liberties as Mahler did! ;D
--Todd
-
I am not myself generally a fan of MTT's Mahler, due to his not-just-slow but often flaccid tempi and obvious underlinings. He and the SFSO did an M5 here in Boston maybe twelve years ago that I would have walked out on had I not been in the middle of a row. But then in California I heard an M9 that was pretty good... until the last movement, which was spellbinding. Nor am I a big fan of his discs, live-recorded though they are. (I tend to dislike studio stuff.)
However. In 1972 he did an M9 with the BSO that was superb all the way through (I have it on tape). Local word had it that the dress rehearsal was even better, and they never stopped for corrections. (No known recording... anyone?) And then there was a Friday night special of the Rite of Spring that was astonishing for all the usual good reasons, plus it seemed that each principal player had somehow gotten tuned in to Stravinsky Spirit, so they played with voicings and phrasings that one had never heard before -- and everything was absolutely wonderful. Could all that have been achieved in rehearsal, or was it... magic?
I only mention this to illustrate what I thought happened in the M2 at Tanglewood -- i.e. the same sort of thing. From the very first few measures I knew we were in for it and I happily went on that wild ride with the band. MTT seemed completely non-intrusive, letting the music unfold just as the orchestra wished. Now that's conducting.
-
I only mention this to illustrate what I thought happened in the M2 at Tanglewood -- i.e. the same sort of thing. From the very first few measures I knew we were in for it and I happily went on that wild ride with the band. MTT seemed completely non-intrusive, letting the music unfold just as the orchestra wished. Now that's conducting.
I do not know if it was only conducting, I call it the planet alignment when everything come together and sound flow naturally as it was not a part of performing efforts but an organic past of nature. I remember in the mid of the second movement I look back mentally at the first movement and asked myself “what just happened?” The symphony was so smartly lubricated and it was spilling itself so smoothly that I had no desire to do any forensic digging and or to think what section or what participant did better or worse. Also, BSO is mostly play with constipative efforts and in each phase hey do with a huge amount of visible labor. That time it was very different – it was almost light and ironically-easy. I was a great concert and in my view it was very deferent Mahler reading then I am accustomed. I actually got horny top writing it and I l listed my recording of the concert this weekend.