gustavmahlerboard.com
General Category => Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions => Topic started by: James Meckley on September 23, 2011, 06:46:56 PM
-
On Monday night (9/26), Hugh Wolff and the New England Conservatory Philharmonia will give the American première of the earliest known version of Mahler's first symphony, the 1889 Budapest version, titled "Symphonic Poem in Two Parts." This should not be confused with the 1893 Hamburg version, of which there are several recordings available (Wakasugi, Ruud, de Vriend, Hermus, and others). The location of Mahler's original autograph score (1888, Leipzig) which was the basis for both 1889 and 1893, is currently unknown and thought to be lost.
http://www.boston.com/ae/music/articles/2011/09/23/an_american_premiere_of_mahlers_first_the_first_version/
http://www.necmusic.edu/mahler
Let's hope this version receives a good recording soon.
James
-
Let's hope this version receives a good recording soon.
James
I hope so too. Looks like it's gonna be an intresting fall in New England.
Roffe
-
Very cool! Thanks for posting about this.
-
I would be most interested in hearing the Finale, in which in this earliest surviving copyist's manuscript the recapitulation begins with a more or less verbatim repeat of the opening of the movement.
Mike Bosworth
-
A couple of additional bits of information:
1) It's been announced that the NEC Philharmonia performance of the 1889 Budapest version is going to be recorded and CDs will be made available to the general public.
2) The recording of the 1893 Hamburg version that I mentioned above with Anthony Hermus conducting the Hagen Philharmonic Orchestra on the Acousence Classics label should be avoided at all costs. It is quite possibly the worst recording I've ever heard of anything.
James
-
I have the Ruud recording on Simax of the 1893 Hamburg version (It also contains a recording of the Piano Quartet). That's pretty good, but a little hard to find, but available from amazon.co.uk vendors for about GBP 10 (+ P&P).
Roffe
Amazon.com review (but the recording is out of print):
5.0 out of 5 stars Original Version of Mahler Symphony Gloriously Performed!!, November 5, 2000
By Darin Tysdal (Bloomington, MN 55420) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE) This review is from: Titan: Symphonic Poem In Symphonic Form / Piano Quartet in a Minor (Audio CD)
This piece is actually called Titan: Symphonic Poem In Symphonic Form. This does include Blumine and the rest of the work is in the earliest surviving orchestration. Wyn Morris made the first recording of this version, and as that is out of print, this one admirably fills the bill. This is then the real thing, not like those recordings that just throw in Blumine into the text of the revised version. There are many little differences between the two versions and comparing them is fascinating. The big difference is the textures which are sparser and not as big. Clarity is the watchword here, and Ruud delivers. The big moments come out with a will, and are very well done. Very recommendable, along with the only existing movement from Mahler's early Piano Quintet. Great annotations and wonderful sound. The playing is wonderful. Recommended with enthusiasm!
-
I have the Ruud recording on Simax of the 1893 Hamburg version (It also contains a recording of the Piano Quartet). That's pretty good, but a little hard to find...
Agreed. The Ruud in fine, as is the Wakasugi. The Hermus is absolutely dreadful. I've not heard the de Vriend, but it's gotten good reviews.
Glad to see the Gustav Mahler Board back up and running!
James
-
You can say that again. I got the hickups when I tried to log in yesterday evening and was met by a site with a message that the server was hacked by some people in Bangladesh. I was afraid that it was gonna affect my computer too, but I don't think it has.
Roffe
-
Greetings from Boston, just outside Jordan Hall! I've got ticket in hand for both the Kaplan presentation and the 1st sympony performance this evening. I'm sure it will be a memorable evening. Report to follow tomorrow!
Cheers!
Herb
-
I'm working on a post of my impressions of last night's performance, and in the meantime just noticed the concert is already up at InstantEncore:
http://necmusic.edu/instant-encore
Enjoy!
Herb
-
I'm working on a post of my impressions of last night's performance, and in the meantime just noticed the concert is already up at InstantEncore:
http://necmusic.edu/instant-encore
Enjoy!
Herb
Watch out! The possibility of listening or downloading seems to expire on 4 Oct 2011 2:09 AM. So hurry if you are interested.
Roffe
-
it seems to still be available, through 10/8, maybe that is the time each individual has to download. Not familiar with "Instant Encore" but I signed up to listen to this since I am preparing an essay on "Blumine" for the Kansas City Symphony's January performance of the "Blumine" movement.
-
You know, I've never heard the Blumine movement as none of my recordings of M1 have it . Am I missing much?
Dave
-
You know, I've never heard the Blumine movement as none of my recordings of M1 have it . Am I missing much?
Dave
It's a quiet, short movement with trumpet solo. Think of it as about a five-minute, slow-tempo version of the second movement of M3. I can't say that it adds anything of significance to the symphony, but that's my opinion. Nevertheless, it's worth hearing, and if anything, at least one recording of the symphony with that movement included should be in every Mahlerian's library. My one recording of it is Ormandy/Philly.
Wade
-
I don't think the Blumine movement should be heard together with the final version of M1 (like in Ozawas BSO recording on DG from ca 1980), since the orchestration of it then "sticks out" too much compared to the rest of the symphony. Blumine is best enjoyed together with the 1893 Hamburg version (of which James had exellent suggestions for recordings earlier in this thread) or the 1889 Budapest version (whiuch can be obtained from Instant-Encore).
Roffe
-
Familiarity with the final version of M1 means that the beginning of 'Blumine' can be quite disconcerting. It just doesn't seem to belong, no doubt because you expect to hear something completely different. On the other hand, to me the next movement seems to follow 'Blumine' very naturally, as if they really do belong together. On the whole I still prefer M1 without 'Blumine'.
-
I think that most leading scholars would agree that the 1893 Hamburg "Blumine"
manuscript, after ingoring Mahler's emendations to it, is probably very similar,
if not the same as the version performed in Budapest in 1889. In fact, it is
likely to be nearly if not identical to the score of the first number that
made up Mahler's incidental "Trompeter" music from 1884. I have argued in
a recent paper that "Blumine" should/could be 'recast' in performance as
incidental music from "Der Trompeter von Säkkingen".
With Mahler's decision to delete "Blumine" from the First Symphony after just 3
performances, he effectively returned this music to its origins. Considering its
originally sanctioned 1884 guise it is more properly heard and enjoyed for what
it really is--a simple, dreamy, romantic depiction of Werner's "Serenande across the
Rhine" to his beloved.
I therefore applaud the conductor Danièle Gatti, who in his recent
chronological performances of Mahler's works in Paris separated "Blumine"
from his later concert featuring the First Symphony, coupling it instead
with the earlier "Das klagende Lied" and "Lieder eines fahrenden Gesellen".
Mike Bosworth
-
Here are two excellent reviews of this performance:
http://classical-scene.com/2011/09/27/nec-unties-one-for-mahler/
http://articles.boston.com/2011-09-29/ae/30218872_1_mahler-first-jordan-hall-serenade
Cheers,
Herb
-
These reviews lead people to believe that what was heard was a performance of "the 1889 manuscript of Mahler 1 as performed
in Budapest in 1889". This is a dangerously distorted view of the facts, and in general I have my doubts as to the usefulness
of this attempt at performing a so-called "first version" of the symphony. Given that I was not able to hear the lecture given before
the performance, I would like to make a few comments.
1) The true "first version" of the symphony is Mahler's own manuscript from
the spring of 1888, at which time he reported to friends and family 'and so, my
work is finished'. Unfortunately this is now missing. Very shortly after this Mahler
began shopping the piece around to leading conductors in cities like Dresden
and Munich, hoping for a quick performance. He would have had copyists make
copies for him for this purpose, so that the University of Western Ontario copyist's
manuscript very llikely dates from 1888, not 1889.
2) The Budapest performance did not take place until 1 1/2 years after the work's
completion, and it seems that it can't be fully determined which of Mahler's edits
to the incomplete University of Western Ontario copyist's manuscript came before
the 1889 Budapest performance rather than after.
3) It should be stressed once again that the UWO manuscript is
missing both the "Blumine" and "Frère Jacques" movements. I think that most
leading scholars would agree that the 1893 "Blumine" manuscript, after
ingoring Mahler's emendations, is probably very similar, perhaps even the same
as the version performed in Budapest. The most unfortunate hole in the
UWO manuscript is the missing "Frère Jacques" movement, which leaves us
unsure as to how this really sounded in Budapest in 1889. To fill these two
gaps, the New England Conservatory organisers had to resort to plugging in the
1893 'Hamburg' versions of both "Blumine" and "Frère Jacques".
4) Therefore, what was performed the other night would more exactly be
described as a dubious kluged "1888-1893" version of M1 (and certainly not
a definitive "Budapest" version). I would think that it would have been better to
limit things to the lecture on the UWO manuscript coupled with the accompanying
musical examples played by the orchestra to demonstrate the variances with the
version we are now used to.
Mike Bosworth
Here are two excellent reviews of this performance:
http://classical-scene.com/2011/09/27/nec-unties-one-for-mahler/
http://articles.boston.com/2011-09-29/ae/30218872_1_mahler-first-jordan-hall-serenade
-
I've played in two performances of M1 (final version) where "Blumine" had been reinserted into its original, second movement position. I really like it, but that's just me. I don't think people notice the 'difference in orchestration' so much during a live performance. It's probably more bothersome while listening at home.
-
A video of this performance has been uploaded to youtube....in 720p, no less, though I imagine the sound is still far short of audiophile grade.
Part one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uJnc5lYx6E
Part two
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjh2pucllRQ&feature=related
-
Thanks for mentioning this. I look forward in particular to hearing what the Finale sounds like.
Strangely, the first video says that this is the "1888-1889" version, but at the start of the second video it calls it the "1884-1889" version (probably because the original Trompeter/Blumine music dates from 1884?). These are in fact both wrong. As I posted earlier, two of the movements in this performance were of necessity lifted from the 1893 "Hamburg" manuscript. In my opinion it should really be entitled the "1888-1893" version--in other words, a kluged version of questionable value beyond revealing Mahler's original conception of the Finale.
Mike Bosworth
Hanoi
A video of this performance has been uploaded to youtube....in 720p, no less, though I imagine the sound is still far short of audiophile grade.
Part one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uJnc5lYx6E
Part two
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjh2pucllRQ&feature=related