gustavmahlerboard.com
General Category => Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions => Topic started by: barry guerrero on June 07, 2014, 03:44:30 PM
-
. . . they all just 'suck' one way or another. Mahler rules but Mahler also raises the bar tremendously. Anybody have an interesting candidates? . . .
-
Barry, how about a change of pace and try something other than orchestral music? How about the organ? The organ is the one instrument that comes closest to reproducing the orchestra in texture, scope, and power.
The one composer of the organ I have in mind is Julius Reubke. Tragically, Reubke lived a short life, and had a paltry output. But the one work he wrote that is one of the most powerful I've ever heard, and which comes very close to Mahler in vision and scope, is his Sonata on the 94th Psalm. From the opening notes of the work, you know that Reubke is going to deal with profound issues that Mahler did, particularly in M2. But Reubke, in the short half hour of his Sonata, essentially presents many of the same questions that Mahler does in M2, but unfortunately, doesn't totally resolve the issue(s), as Mahler did.
I heard this work many years ago at an organ recital, and the work shook me to the very depths of my being, similar to how Mahler does in M2. I have the Simon Preston recording mentioned in the below Wikipedia link, but it doesn't come close to reproducing the power of the work as does a hard-to-get recording that never appeared on CD, but on LP. That one was by David McVey, playing the Moller-Rosales organ in the Bridges Hall of Music at Pomona College, Claremont, CA. Record label is Orion ORS 78282. This particular recording is considered one of the finest ever made of a large organ (sound-wise), but opinion on the quality of performance could be debatable, as I'm not an expert on organ music literature.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonata_on_the_94th_Psalm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonata_on_the_94th_Psalm)
Wade
-
I have been enjoying some of Shostakovich's symphonies (especially 4, 5, 8, 10, 15) and concertos. Petrenko/RLPO on Naxos have incredible sonics and interpretation for the most part, and the cello and violin concertos are very interesting.
-
Speaking of the organ, in addition to the usual suspects (S.-S. "Organ" Symphony, Poulen'c Organ Cto., etc.) I do like that big, noisy work by Jongen for organ and orchestra. I also very much like the Petrenko cycle of Shostakovich symphonies. Thanks guys.
-
When I'm not listening to Mahler I find myself heading right toward Wagner and the Ring, Meistersinger or Tristan. Then maybe some Janacek, Scriabin or Rachmaninov. Mozart and his operas really do it for me too. When I feel the need to head back to my trumpet playing days I'll put on something by Hakan Hardenberger, Stephen Burns or a friend of mine who is a baroque trumpet specialist. Also the German Brass, if you're interested in brass ensemble work. They are incredible.
Hans Gal sounds interesting to me as well. I'll be picking up his 4 symphonies sometime in the near future.
-
You know, it's funny: I like Scriabin quite a bit, but a lot of classical pianists seem to have an aversion to him. I can't figure that out. His music can't be that much harder to play than Rachmaninoff's. I too love "The Ring", and act two of "Tristan" is amazing. I have an orchestral synthesis made of music from "Meistersinger" which is quite fun. Thanks guys, these are all great suggestions. I do love Janacek, and pretty much have everything that he composed. I even have the Naxos series of orchestral suites from the Janacek operas. Good stuff.
-
I know this is going to sound biased (I live in Worcester UK) but I just love Elgar, or as I think of him, the Mahler of the Malvern Hills. A near-contemporary of our hero, he had much in common with him - he was a moody, intense creature, a hill walker and a keen cyclist. (As far as I know, he didn't compose in a shed, though!) More to the point, he wrote some wonderful works, including his masterpiece "The Dream of Gerontius", and the "Enigma Variations" but only two completed symphonies unfortunately, of which my favourite is his First. I must admit to having a soft spot for his early cantata, "Caractacus".
For what it may be worth, I also love some of the works of Bach, and Chopin. (I play the piano badly!)
-
Among English composers, I tend to like Vaughan Williams and Britten best. Then again, I play tuba and there's that fabulous concerto for Tuba by V-W. Most of the V-W symphonies have healthy tuba parts. Elgar: I like best the "Enigma" Variations - especially when they add the organ pedals at the end - and the second symphony. The first symphony might be stronger overall, but the second has one of THE great adagio movements of all time (along with the slow movements from Dvorak 3 & 9; the adagios from Bruckner symphonies 6 - 9 ((and particularly 6)), and, of course, Mahler's great slow movements). I like Elgar's violin concerto more than his cello concerto, but the cello one is certainly more succinct. I don't know any of his chamber music, but I do like the chamber music from both V-W and Britten (particularly the Britten quartets). I actually think Elgar's second symphony might work better with the order of the two inner movements switched. A friend of mine from London agrees with me. I've played it back on my stereo that way and it works fine.
I just picked up a GREAT cd on Hyperion of the two Kodaly string quartets played by the Dante Quartet. They're the house quartet at King's College Cambridge, and have even done some interesting collaborations with the famous boy's choir there. The two Kodaly quartets sound like what the famous Bartok ones SHOULD sound like (just an opinion). Kodaly's "Peacock" Variations is one of my very favorite orchestral works. His Concerto for Orchestra is underrated, and should get coupled with the well known Bartok one some day (or with the lesser known Lutoslawski one).
Chopin. Well . . . I'm not a pianist. If I was a pianist I would want to sound more like Bill Evans or Oscar Peterson. I personally prefer the more 'masculine' style of Liszt (love "Totentanz"), although Chopin was certainly more consistent. I'll finish by telling a story.
Once upon a time, a man came into a Tower Records shop and was annoyed that I was playing Mahler (perhaps I had it up a tad loud, I don't remember). He told me that he'd rather have one Nocturne (Prelude, Etude; I dont' remember) from Chopin than ALL of the symphonies by Mahler. I told him that I didn't view it as an either/or situation, and that there's plenty of room in the world for all kinds of music. Then I said the following:
"But, if somebody put a gun to my head and told me that I had to choose or die, I would take one movement of Mahler than ALL of the piano music of Chopin". Needless to say, he had no sense of humor.
-
I personally prefer the more 'masculine' style of Liszt (love "Totentanz"), although Chopin was certainly more consistent.
Some "consistent " works of Chopin : the four ballads for their epic, imaginative and dramatic content, the four scherzos for their fantastic and diabolic side, the two sonatas, very different from each other and original , the polonaise-fantaisie formally and harmonically audacious , the fantaisie. op 49.
To me, the most interesting of Chopin to recommend to a mahlerian (or not). Unfortunately Chopin still remains better known of the general audiance for his nocturnes and walzes and a few etudes and preludes contributing to convey this image of "ethereal" to his music.
-
Across 15 symphonies (well, 1, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 13, 14, 15 are the greats), only Shostakovich comes close to Mahler to satisfying that desire: and, of course, the influence of GM is imprinted all over them. (Bonus: 15 quartets, 2 fab operas, and astounding sonatas, concertos, vocal, and piano works).
-
Hey, Barry - ever tried any Havergal Brian? He wrote some pretty massive music, especially the 1st symphony "The Gothic", but some of his other symphonies are well worth exploring too. Try no.6 "Sinfonia Tragica" in particular.
-
I know the "Gothic". It's a bit over-the-top for me. But hey, I'll give #6 a spin. Thanks.
-
Once upon a time, a man came into a Tower Records shop and was annoyed that I was playing Mahler (perhaps I had it up a tad loud, I don't remember). He told me that he'd rather have one Nocturne (Prelude, Etude; I dont' remember) from Chopin than ALL of the symphonies by Mahler. I told him that I didn't view it as an either/or situation, and that there's plenty of room in the world for all kinds of music. Then I said the following:
"But, if somebody put a gun to my head and told me that I had to choose or die, I would take one movement of Mahler than ALL of the piano music of Chopin". Needless to say, he had no sense of humor.
He wasn't related to Sir Thomas Beecham was he? I recall TB said he would willingly trade one entr'acte by Massenet for all Bruckner's symphonies, and would have considered he had benefitted greatly by the exchange… at least I think it was Massenet but you get the idea…
I too am a great lover of Elgar's Second symphony, and tend to collect recordings - if you are greatly moved by the wonderfully spiritual Adagio I recommend Jeffrey Tate's LSO recording on EMI, probably my favourite for the whole work.
The Elgar violin concerto must be the greatest ever - though I love the cello concerto, and as a cellist I used to battle my way through it.
One 'rare' work I'm very fond of is Tubin's melodious Fourth Symphony, the 'Lyric' - Volmer's CD on Alba is the one I have and I like it a lot though Jarvi recorded it for BIS and that is the usual library recommendation. It is a lovely piece and very uplifting.
-
Thanks for the Tubin recommendation. Now that makes may 'wish list' Brian #6 and Tubin #4. Yes, I could very well imagine Beecham having said something like that. Thanks again.
-
. . . they all just 'suck' one way or another. Mahler rules but Mahler also raises the bar tremendously. Anybody have an interesting candidates? . . .
I'm sorry, but this has to dumbest post I've read in a very, very long time. In fact, this seems to be symptomatic for the "Mahler Problem." Because of the spectaculair nature of his music (on the surface at least), Mahler attracts many listeners who simply don't have a clue about music (as mr. guerrero's post so aptly proves). Arguably, a contemporary like Debussy was a much greater composer than Mahler, certainly of greater importance historically, but he doesn't have a following of dimwitted groupies who make outrageous statements about other composers whose music "sucks" compared to that of their guru.
I'll probably have my head bitten off for this, and I really do love Mahler. In fact, I love Mahler so much that I felt compelled to reply to Mr. Guerrero's monumentally stupid post because if there is one composer who needs to be saved from his "friends", it's Mahler (not that I could save him, only orchestra's and record companies and conductors could do that).
(Oh, and, in answer to your question, there ARE other composers who are worth investigating and who really do not "suck," ever heard of Bach, Mozart, Schubert, Haydn, Beethoven, Brahms, Schumann, Mendelssohn, Chopin, Liszt, Berlioz, Wagner, Verdi, Bruckner, R. Strauss, Elgar, Sibelius, Schönberg, Berg, Webern, Stravinsky, to name just a few??)
-
I think if you took a moment to 'read beyond the notes' (so to speak), you'd probably realize that what I'm saying is that I'm having trouble finding new things to listen to that hold my attention. I'm extremely familiar with ALL of the composers you listed. I like Debussy very much, but I wouldn't consider him greater than Mahler. Instead, I would say that it's 'apples and oranges'. To me, that's a bit like the comment by the fellow who said he'd rather have one piece of Chopin than everything by Mahler. Why does there need to be an either/or situation?
That said, I'll stick to my guns by saying that, IMHO, Mahler does raise the bar very greatly. I think there are very few composers AFTER Mahler who are the equal of him. One composer you listed was Alban Berg. I like Berg very much, as I think he composed two of the greatest operas of the 20th Century, along with my favorite violin concerto of the last century (Sibelius' would be #2 for me). Berg's "Drei Stucke fur Orchester" is an obvious successor to Mahler 6 - a work that Berg greatly admired (along with the first movement of M9).
As for Webern, he's simply not among my favorites. In comparison to Schoenberg, I appreciate Webern's much leaner, more sparse textures, along with Webern's brevity to his works. In general, I actually enjoy Stravinsky's late 12 tone works more than Webern's. That brings me to Stravinsky.
Many would say that Stravinsky was THE greatest composer of the last century. I do like Stravinsky but I don't subscribe to that opinion (for me, it would be late Mahler, Berg, Ravel and Shostakovich). He was very prolific, so some works were obviously better than others. For me, Stravinsky's 'neo-classical' period ran on a bit too long. Thus, I'm thankful that he evolved towards the end, as he did so quite well. Obviously, "The Rite" was a milestone work, along with Debussy's "Afternoon of a Faun". There ARE at least a dozen truly great works by Stravinsky. But there are also quite a few that many people, including myself, could pretty much take or leave.
Anyway, that's enough. I do subscribe to what Boulez said about 'minimalist' music. When asked, "what do think of minimalist music?", Boulez answered, "minimal". One post-Mahler composer who you didn't list, who I DO like, is Francis Poulenc. Carl Nielsen is another.
p.s. (written later)
Going back to my exaggerated expression of 'suckage', I'll give you recent example. I just recently picked up a couple of Per Norgard symphonies on the Da Capo label, performed superbly by the Vienna Phil. (and a gorgeous sacd/cd hybrid recording as well). While the music is both colorful and dynamic, as with so many modern composers, I just think there's not enough of a 'narrative' to justify the length of these works. Boulez described Mahler's music as being both 'epic', and 'narrative' like in quality. I agree.
-
Now that sounds much more thought-through than saying other composers music "sucks.." (an extreme case of apples and oranges I would say). Comparing composers actually seems fruitless to me, I was just making the point that Debussy suffers much less hyperbole than Mahler does, probably because his music lacks the spectacular surface of (some of) Mahlers music (his Preludes for piano are a notable exception).
Anyway, brushing aside ALL other composer and saying their music sucks doesn't leave much room for subleties beyond the notes.
-
Well, sure, if you compare Mahler to Per Norgard, then yes, other composers do suck..
-
I think if you had bothered to read the posts following my initial one, you might have gleaned that we were discussing primarily post-Mahler compositions. Names like Gal, Tubin and Havergal Brian came up. Most of the people who post here are 'regulars', so they know where I'm going with such a statement. Nowhere did I say that Bach sucks, Schumann sucks, Schubert sucks, etc. In fact, if you had taken time to look around at other postings, you might have even gathered that I - like Mahler and many others - very much like the Schumann symphonies. I think most everybody here does.
-
Let's put this whole business behind us and let me give you some titles of compositions by post-Mahler composers and contemporaries that do not suck:
Debussy: Pelleas et Melisande, Jeux, Chansons de bilitis, La Mer, Noctures, sonatas
Berg: the operas, Chamber Symphony, Altenberg Songs and the pieces you mentioned earlier
Schönberg: Piano Concerto, Pierrot Lunaire, Herzgewächse, Erwartung, Chamber Symphonies, String Trio, Buch der hängenden Gärten, Orchestra Variations, 5 Pieces for Orchestra, Serenade
Bartok: 6 String Quartets, Bluebeards Castle, Music for Strings, Percussion and Celesta, Piano Concertos, Violin Concerto(s)
Elgar: 2 Symphonies, Falstaff, Introduction and Allegro, Violin- and Cello Concertos, Piano Quintet
Walton: Symphonies, Concertos, Troilus and Cressida
Stravinsky: Les Noces, Oedipus Rex, Rake's Progress, Violin Concerto, Mavra, Agon, Apollo Musagete, Orpheus, Persephone, Baiser de la Fee, Cantata
Strauss: Salome, Elektra, Rosenkavalier, Frau ohne Schatten, Metamorphosen, Oboe Concerto, 4 Last Songs, Arabella
Webern: Orchesterstücke op. 6, Variations op. 28, Cantata 1 and 2
Ravel: Gaspard de la Nuit, String Quartet, Introduction and Allegro, l'Enfant et les Sortileges, Piano Concerto, Shéhérezade, Le tombeau de Couperin, Mallarmé Songs
Janacek: Every single opera of his!
Britten: Peter Grimes, Billy Budd, String Quartets, Nocturne, Serenade, Michelangelo Sonnets, Winter Words
Pfitzner: the songs! Palestrina, Piano Concerto
Lutoslawski: Symphonic Variations, Piano Concerto
Franz Schmidt: Symphony 4
Frank Martin: Petite Symphonie Concertante, Golgotha, Die Weise von Liebe und Tod des Cornets Christoph Rilke
Hindemtih: Mathis der Maler, Symphonische Metamorphosen, Ludus Tonalis, Das Marienleben, Kammermusik 1-7, Mörder, Hoffnung der Frauen, Cardillac
Reger: Bach- Hiller- Mozart, Beethoven-Variations, Symphonic Prologue to a Tragedy, Piano Concerto
Vierne: Piano Quintet, Organ Symphonies
Chausson: Le Roi Arthus, String Quartet, most of the songs
Busoni: Piano Concerto, Berceuse Élégaique
Sibelius: Symphonies, Tapiola
Prokofiev: Symphonies, some of the operas, Piano Concerto nr. 2
Ives: Concord Sonata, Symphony nr. 4
Diepenbrock: Im grossen Schweigen, Elektra, Marsyas
Willem Pijper: Symphony nr. 2, String Quartets
Vaughan Williams: Symphonies 4, 5 and 6, Riders to the Sea, Job, Piano Concerto, 5 Tudor Portraits, Serenade to music
Orff: Der Mond, Die Kluge
Tippett: A Child of our Time
Korngold: Die Tote Stadt, Violin Concerto
Schreker: Die ferne Klang, Die Gezeichneten
Zemlinksy: Lyrische Sinfonie, Florentinische Tragödie
Honeger: Jeanne d'Arc au Bucher
Milhaud: Le Boeuf sur le toit, La Création du monde
Zimmermann: Die Soldaten
Berio: Rendering, Sinfonia, Folk Songs
Puccini: Turandot, Fanciulla del West, La Rondine
Szymanowski: Król Roger, Violin Concertos
Hartmann:Simplicius Simplicissimus
Messiaen: Poemes pour Mi, Quatour pour la fin de temps, Visions de l'Amen
Etc, Etc, Etc
I could go on, and on, and of course, you've already stated your opinions on Stravinsky, Schönberg, Webern and Berg in a previous post and it's always a matter of personal taste. Maybe it's just the wording of your orginal post, but I assure you, none of the music by these (mostly post Mahler) composers "and their CD's.." sucks!
-
I have been attempting to stay out of this. However, dal segno, until your arrival this board has been outstanding in terms of respect and caring for one another. Act with caring and respect, or do us all a favor and cancel your account. The kind of vitriol and back-biting you spread has no place here, or anywhere, for that matter.
-
IMFFHO, calling someone's post "stupid" adds nothing to any conversation, and is judgmental and belittling. And you claim you are objectively speaking???
I also find your comment, "..you guys shouldn't react like, well, little girls when someone doesn't agree with you" to be demeaning and sexist at best.
Next time you desire to point a finger at someone, do it whilst looking in a mirror.
-
Actually, I have added him, second from below. Great composer.
-
Sorry, Hartmann's on the list, although I have trouble with that opera.
-
It's not an easy work to love indeed, but a great and important work nevertheless. Some of his symphonies are truly outstanding. They really do not "suck" at all!
-
Yes,an interesting and very fine composer who should be performed far more.
Thanks for the fine list. So how about Martinu? The sixth symphony and Gilgamesh don't suck either. Also the second violin concerto.