gustavmahlerboard.com
General Category => Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions => Topic started by: John Kim on September 25, 2013, 06:30:37 AM
-
http://www.sa-cd.net/showtitle/8937
-
It's available for download (up to 24/192) from Linn Records here:
http://www.linnrecords.com/recording-mahler-symphony-no-2-resurrection.aspx
Russell
-
No Zander recording is complete without his famous, in-depth discussions; in this case, his discussion of the M2 is available as a free download from Linn here (all 106 minutes of it!):
http://www.linnrecords.com/recording-mahler-symphony-no--2-discussion-disc.aspx
Russell
-
Thanks Russell !!!
-
How do I create a disc from the files so that I can listen to it in any CD player rather than use my computer? Thanks.
-
How do I create a disc from the files so that I can listen to it in any CD player rather than use my computer? Thanks.
You need to convert the audio files you downloaded from that site to .WAV files so that whatever CD burning program you use on your computer can change the .WAV files to .CDA files that make any CD an audio CD. To do the conversion of the files you downloaded, I suggest using FoxTab Audio Converter (http://foxtab-audio-converter.software.informer.com/ (http://foxtab-audio-converter.software.informer.com/)). Download it (it's free) and install on your computer. It'll take a little working with it to get used to how it works, and once you've converted the downloaded audio files to .WAV files, go ahead and burn your audio CD's.
Wade
-
:) Thank you Wade !
Edit: FoxTab Audio Converter was unavailable :(
Edit: Not to worry, found another one ;D
-
Bear in mind that CD is only 16 bits/44.1 kHz, so if you downloaded the higher-resolution files (24/96 or 24/192), listening to those files via your computer will sound better (assuming you're feeding the signal via USB to an external DAC). As for burning a CD, I've noticed that, at least with iTunes on my Mac, the step of converting high-res files to 16/44.1 before burning to CD is not necessary. I merely select the file(s) and it automatically does the down-conversion to 16/44.1 on-the-fly while burning the CD. (I assume it up-converts lower-res files, like MP3s, as well.)
Russell
-
I assume it up-converts lower-res files, like MP3s, as well.
Yes, iTunes up-converts automatically when burning CDs from MP3s.
The real problem with iTunes is that it won't handle FLAC files of any resolution—these must first be converted to a Mac-friendly format like ALAC.
James
-
The real problem with iTunes is that it won't handle FLAC files of any resolution—these must first be converted to a Mac-friendly format like ALAC.
James
Very true. It's not a big deal to convert, but one nice thing about Linn's site is that they offer their files in ALAC format (as well as FLAC and MP3), so no conversion would be necessary for importing into iTunes..
Russell
-
Has anybody heard this recording yet?
-
John, I downloaded Zander's free in-depth discussion about M2 and the problems encountered in performing it. However, I haven't ordered the SACD as of yet. What I heard in his discussion and the accompanying musical examples sounded pretty good to me, performance-wise. From it, I deduce that it's obvious he's gleaned every possible bit of information and studied the problems involved in conducting the work, and juxtaposed those against the recorded performances of other famous conductors who performed the work. I might suggest you download his discussion and listen to it first, before you draw any final conclusions about his full recorded performance. Bottom line, I'm open-minded about how certain parts of the work maybe ought be performed, such as the tempo of the final downward string phrase that concludes the first movement, which he discusses.
Wade
-
Since I really don't have time to do the download, and since I'm not going to be purchasing the CDs, could you summarize his thoughts about the tempo for the descending run at the end of the first movement? Much appreciated.
-
Here is the Boston Globe review:
" MAHLER: Symphony No. 2, “Resurrection”
Benjamin Zander, Philharmonia Orchestra
(Linn Records, 3 CDs)
With the announcement, in 2009, that Telarc Records would no longer produce its own recordings, it seemed all too possible that Benjamin Zander would never finish his Mahler symphony cycle with the Philharmonia Orchestra of London. So it’s good to see their performance of Symphony No. 2, the “Resurrection,” recorded last year and now out on Glasgow-based Linn Records, which has already in its catalog CDs of Martin Pearlman and Boston Baroque in Haydn’s “The Creation” and “Lord Nelson” Mass. We can hope — and expect — that Zander will be able to complete his cycle with the Seventh and Eighth.
There’s more good news: This release includes the usual Zander discussion disc, in which he goes well beyond what you normally find in liner notes to explicate the music. Of special note here is the background of Mahler’s relationship with the great conductor Hans von Bülow, Zander’s notion of rubato in the second-movement ländler, and his helpful interpretation of the sprawling last movement as a series of panels in a fresco.
The performance itself is expansive, running just over 90 minutes. It’s scrupulous; if you follow along with a score, you can observe how carefully Zander has adhered to Mahler’s markings, including his glissandos and portamentos. It’s tender and reverent, and full of detail. Some will want greater agony and anguish, greater contrast within each movement, more cogent shaping of phrases, and a firmer overall arc. Linn’s recording is also a bit problematic; the brass, particularly the trumpets, sound recessed, and the ruthe (a kind of drum beater) is barely audible. Soprano Miah Persson and mezzo Sarah Connolly, on the other hand, are excellent, and Zander rises to the challenge of the closing pages. I suspect this Second will reward repeated listenings, but it should be supplemented by a more muscular interpretation like Otto Klemperer’s with the same orchestra or William Steinberg’s with the BSO."
-
"Mahler’s relationship with the great conductor Hans von Bülow, Zander’s notion of rubato in the second-movement ländler, and his helpful interpretation of the sprawling last movement as a series of panels in a fresco."
No offense, but none of that is really news.
"and the ruthe (a kind of drum beater) is barely audible"
Ruthe is a 'bunch' of birch branches tied together, struck against either the head or the wooden shell of the drum (usually the wooden shell in M2). It comes from the Turkish 'Janissary' bands, then Haydn adopted it for his "Military" symphony. The rest is Mahlerian history. Also, 'barely audible' ain't a good thing.
-
"and the ruthe (a kind of drum beater) is barely audible"
Also, 'barely audible' ain't a good thing.
It's particularly not a good thing for an SACD. We're supposed to hear more on an SACD, not less. I wonder if the col legno work in the strings in the first movement are likewise barely audible?
-
Since I really don't have time to do the download, and since I'm not going to be purchasing the CDs, could you summarize his thoughts about the tempo for the descending run at the end of the first movement? Much appreciated.
Being a musical ignoramus I'm not in the best position to respond in any great depth Barry. The talk is broken up into tracks and the one discussing the end of the first movement is Track 08 (12:52).
Zander first plays three examples to illustrate how differently conductors have taken the descent:
Klemperer 1960 - very rapid
Rattle 2011 - very slow
Tilson Thomas 2004 - in between (Just right? ;D)
He then goes on to look at metronome markings for the opening (144), and for the funeral march section (84-92) which he states that virtually no conductor follows except for Oscar Fried in 1924. Most conductors apparently settle for something much slower, illustrated by Bernstein (63) and Barbirolli (76). Zander states that he has usually settled for 72-76 in his performances. He recorded M2 with the Philharmonia in 2009 and wanted to be true to Mahler's instructions, settling for metronome 84. He was apparently horrified at how fast it sounded and gave this as one of the reasons for recording the work again. An extract from the 2009 recording is provided to help make his point.
Zander then goes on to use the funeral march from Beethoven's 'Eroica' (metronome 80) to show that it is way too fast. He says that Beethoven intended the marking to be metronome 40; "it is a slow march in two, not a fast march in four". Zander set a slow tempo at metronome 42 for his new recording "and the orchestra caught it perfectly" (sample followed). He then went on to mention a third tempo (metronome 96) for the "dramatische section which is Tempo secondo" .... ??? and I was even more lost than before. But, Zander obviously felt that everything now fitted perfectly.
Then he got to the issue of the final scale. In the first edition Mahler marked it "schnell" and presumably that was what Klemperer followed in his 1960 recording. Mahler crossed out "schnell" in his own performing score and wrote "Tempo primo". Zander concludes that Rattle presumes that means the tempo of the funeral music making it sound so very slow. "If only Mahler had distinguished Tempo primo and Tempo secondo earlier in the movement, he could have written Tempo secondo over the final scale at the end of the movement, and then everyone would have known to play it around 96 which suggests just the right kind of precipitation but still feels related to the funereal material of the main body of the music" (sample follows).
:-[ I don't really understand what I have just written and hope it makes some sense and helps you understand what Zander was getting at.
By the way, Track 09 (7:45) of the discussion contains "Urlicht" from Zander's unreleased 2009 recording sung by Katarina Karnéus (a replacement for Sarah Connolly who became ill at the time of those recording sessions) . It is a lovely performance in my opinion, and worth downloading.
-
"If only Mahler had distinguished Tempo primo and Tempo secondo earlier in the movement,
Mahler is so vague about specific tempos that I'm convinced that he was intentionally 'leaving the door open' for a myriad of tempo relationship possibilities. It seems that only by trying to decipher what he might have really meant, combined with just plain-old trial and error, can we come up with overall movement performance that works. This is in stark contrast to how he handles matters of phrasing, dynamics, extra-musical sound effects, climaxes, etc. - things that pertain to looking at a score in a vertical manner. In these matters, Mahler was far more specific than almost any other composer - certainly far more than any other 19th century one