gustavmahlerboard.com
General Category => Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions => Topic started by: Dyolf on January 04, 2009, 03:14:47 PM
-
Hi
Have always had my eyes open on the used market for the Klemperer M7 (100 min.) on vinyl or CD, and here the other day I read that Scherchen had done this work in a mindblowing 60 minutes. Are the two of them both bonkers, ore are there excuses for both interpretations. Also, what Scherchen M7 is the one to opt for; I think there is four different out there.
Steen
-
The really fast Scherchen M7 has poor sound and bad playing with tons of mistakes. The Klemperer is just outrageously slow from start to finish. Just be aware of those facts.
Barry
-
Barry
Yeah slow. That is quite obvious. But I am kind of a Klemperer buff, and I have read reviews regarding this recording, saying that it was first after hearing his M7 that this music started to make sense. And I must admit, that M7 is the mahler piece I regard the least. :-[
How is the sound recording and the playing?
Steen
-
Barry
Yeah slow. That is quite obvious. But I am kind of a Klemperer buff, and I have read reviews regarding this recording, saying that it was first after hearing his M7 that this music started to make sense. And I must admit, that M7 is the mahler piece I regard the least. :-[
How is the sound recording and the playing?
Steen
I can't vouch for the playing, since it's been a while, but the recorded sound I remember being excellent as it is in most of Klemperer's EMI recordings [I'm an OK fan and collector].
The performance is slow, yes, almost perversely slow. As I said elsewhere, the recording must be heard to be believed.
-
I've never been a big fan of the Penguin Guide, but one review from years ago described Klemp's M7 as like hearing Strauss' "Elektra" in slow motion. That's a great description. It's interesting in only a tiring and perverted sense - well, to me anyway. Others can disagree. But I certainly don't think that Klemperer somehow makes the work appear more coherent - far from it. He was simply old and tired when the recording was made; falling asleep at the podium. That's the sad truth.
-
Found a guy in Germany who had both Klemp and Scherchen in addition to some other interesting vinyl (Neumann/Czech/Ludwig/M3). I guess its like the film reviews. On a scale from 1 to 10, its the ones in the middle section that are mostly boring, but the 10´ers and the 1´ers are equally interesting. I refuse to believe that the old maestro did that kind of interpretation because he was "old and tired"
Steen
-
I'm not trying to rain on your parade. In the end, one can believe whatever they want; either the performance speaks to you, or it doesn't. But there's plenty of written biographical material - eyewitness accounts - that can substantiate that Klemperer was literally falling asleep at some of his very last recording sessions. It may very well be that Klemp. meant the Mahler 7 just the way he recorded it. But in no way can I believe that he would have conducted it that way in his younger years. He was actually a very zippy conductor in earlier times. After all, Klemperer was at the world premiere in Prague. And while Mahler's own timings weren't super fast by any means (the ink was still wet, and the piece was notoriously difficult to perform), they nowhere approached the glacial timings of Klemperer's EMI recording. But hey, if you like it, you like it! I only responded because you asked the question; so I offered an opinion. The rest is up to you.
-
Posted by Dyolf:
And I must admit, that M7 is the Mahler piece I regard the least.
For a long time I did not care for the 7th. Looking back, I do not know what i did not like about it, as I quite like it now. I do know that the recording that led me to a "eureka!" moment with the symphony was the Kubilek one from his DG set. The Kubilek 7 was rather fast, and even though I do not generally listen to such a fast performance of M7, the speed of that recording somehow helped me finally grasp the greatness of it. I mention this because if you're not that fond of the 7th, it would seem to me that a performance that is almsot legendary for its slowness is not likely IMO to bring you any closer to a higher regard for M7.
-
The recording that won me over was the Haitink on Philips LPs. It has a distinct atmosphere about it that works very well.
M7 is my second least favorite of the symphonies only because I just can't warm up to the finale, no matter who conducts or plays it. I love the first 4 movements though, esp I & II ;)
And Barry G is correct about Klemperer being in poor shape when he recorded this work. Klemp's earliest recorded performances show a very vibrant conductor. None of his other Mahlers on EMI, nor the Bruckners feature these kinds of bizarre tempo choices.
-
Posted bu Klingsor:
M7 is my second least favorite of the symphonies only because I just can't warm up to the finale, no matter who conducts or plays it. I love the first 4 movements though, esp I & II
I'm not crazy about the finale of the 7th either. It just somehow seems to me to not belong with the other movements. Like you, I give Mahler a pass on this because I like the rest of the symphony so much (particularly II & IV).
-
I have the opposite reaction. The finale is fantastic, and echt-Mahler to boot. Think Haydn; think humor; think tounge in cheek. It paves the way from the darkness of his previous 7 movements (I'm leaving out the second Nachtmusik), and dumps us on the doorstep of the mighty 8th symphony. More conductors now are taking the second Nachtmusik quicker, which makes for a more natural transition to the finale. All I can tell you is that I really love it. Again, Mahler's kaleidoscopic orchestration is what truly makes it go.
Barry
-
I friend of mine and I are currently going through some kind of "M7 frenzy", sampling recordings by the dozen, comparing likes and dislikes.
We both would love to hear the famed / notorious Klemperer EMI M7 - if only for the fun of listening to a uniquely different take on a piece we both know quite well.
As this one is being sold at outrageously high prices on eBay / Amazon marketplace, I dare to ask if there's a kind soul here who could provide me with a "less expensive" way of obtaining this recording.
Please pm me if you can help. That would be greatly appreciated!
-
If you sign on to Melomaniacos you can get the Klemp M7 very cheap (free). A great site for rare recordings:
https://melomaniacos.com/search.php?por=0&buscapor=on&keywords=mahler+7&mod=0&mode=on&crit=0&date_ini=&date_fin=
-
If you folks want to fall asleep (which is not a bad idea when it comes to Night Music ;D), try the Klemperer! I guarantee you'll be in a deep sleep half way through the first movt. ;D
OTOH, if you can hold up yourself you can hear lots of details in this recording; they are so much so that it sounds like an entirely different symphony.
I bet that's what Klemperer was after ;D. ;)
John,
-
Nighty night ;D
-
If you sign on to Melomaniacos you can get the Klemp M7 very cheap (free). A great site for rare recordings:
https://melomaniacos.com/search.php?por=0&buscapor=on&keywords=mahler+7&mod=0&mode=on&crit=0&date_ini=&date_fin=
Thanks a lot! This helped greatly.
This recording is insane... had Celibidache ever touched Mahler, it could impossibly have been any slower than this... :o
I'm glad I have it now - for reasons I cannot really name. It feels like a fragment from a time period of recorded music long gone now.
-
If you sign on to Melomaniacos you can get the Klemp M7 very cheap (free). A great site for rare recordings:
https://melomaniacos.com/search.php?por=0&buscapor=on&keywords=mahler+7&mod=0&mode=on&crit=0&date_ini=&date_fin=
Thanks a lot! This helped greatly.
This recording is insane... had Celibidache ever touched Mahler, it could impossibly have been any slower than this... :o
I'm glad I have it now - for reasons I cannot really name. It feels like a fragment from a time period of recorded music long gone now.
You're welcome
I know what you mean. It's hard to imagine any conductor today who has the kind of legendary status that would allow a major company to release such an interpretation. And as you probably know, Klemperer was an indirect link back to Mahler himself, so there is always a certain authority in his conducting this music (despite the famed 'objectivity' which likely would have differed greatly from Mahler's own approach). One thing I always love in Klemperer is the orchestral detail, everything comes through and tells. I still consider his M9 studio recording among the best ever made.
PS: I uploaded a fantastic M6 by Leinsdorf and BSO and and M4 by Sanderling to that site. Check those out.
-
If Mahler is the composer of his own music, how can you get any more "objective" than that? And if you feel that Klemperer is achieving great clarity in his Mahler, then he's very much following the footsteps of Mahler himself, since Mahler placed "clarity" pretty much above all other priorities when it came to dealing with his own orchestrations. All that said, I'm very certain that Klemperer would have conducted the 7th much quicker in his earlier years. In his later years, he was constantly in denial that his tempi were getting slower. But the fact was, he almost couldn't help it. He was a "9 lives" kind of guy. He had many health challenges in the '60s, and had endured great emotional and psychological hardships in previous years.
Barry
-
If Mahler is the composer of his own music, how can you get any more "objective" than that? And if you feel that Klemperer is achieving great clarity in his Mahler, then he's very much following the footsteps of Mahler himself, since Mahler placed "clarity" pretty much above all other priorities when it came to dealing with his own orchestrations. All that said, I'm very certain that Klemperer would have conducted the 7th much quicker in his earlier years. In his later years, he was constantly in denial that his tempi were getting slower. But the fact was, he almost couldn't help it. He was a "9 lives" kind of guy. He had many health challenges in the '60s, and had endured great emotional and psychological hardships in previous years.
Barry
I don't understand this sentence: "If Mahler is the composer of his own music, how can you get any more "objective" than that? "
Klemperer, in his earlier years, was known for his objectivity, ie lack of "interpretation" (of course, before you jump on it, every conductor must interpret in some way). Klemperer was seen for a time as a member of the school of so-called Neue Sachlichkeit (New Objectivity). Mahler, in contrast, was known for his interpretations--often controversial and described as distortions--of others' music. The later Klemperer could sometimes (in this case certainly) be accused of distorting the composer's intentions. I know about his health problems and yes, he could not help it. I still say it was his legendary status that allowed EMI to record him at this stage--perhaps because they also knew he was still capable of great peformance, the M7 notwithstanding. This performance demonstrates a clarity he perhaps had in common with Mahler, but Mahler would not likely have been accused of objectivity (interpretive coolness) in the same way Klemperer was during the Bauhaus years.
-
Sorry, but I don't understand how (or why) you don't understand. ??? . . . What you say may (or may not) be true in cases of Mahler conducting other people's music (frankly, how does one measure such things?). But when it comes to Mahler's own music, how can you get any closer to "the source" than when Mahler is conducting it himself? What would NOT be objective about Mahler conducting Mahler?
In regards to other people's music, let's bring up a couple of examples. In the case of the Mendelssohn "Scotch" symphony, Klemperer deletes the entire "Scottish" sounding chorus at the end of the symphony (it's repeated numerous times), and simply ends it with a quiet chord in minor (I forget the key). I happen to really like it since it's the weakest part of the entire symphony, but how "objective" is that?!?
In his EMI recording of the Bruckner 8th, Klemperer makes numerous cuts in the finale that weren't sanctioned by anybody. Again, how "objective" is that!?! (and again, I happen to like it).
Even in Mahler's "Resurrection" symphony, Klemperer takes the entire "March of risen dead souls" passage of the finale at a much slower tempo than normal. There's nothing in Mahler's tempo descriptions to indicate that he wanted that entire passage played relatively slow (and again, I think it works quite well). But if you're talking in terms of "textural clarity"; then yes, I agree that Klemperer was very good at that. But by all reports, so was Mahler!
Further more, when Mahler made adjustments or changes to other people's music, he did so for the sake of "clarity", due to limitations in the instruments themselves during earlier times. Whether he succeeded or not is certainly matter of opinion and debate. But the intent was for the sake clarity and thus, I submit, for the sake of "objectivity". But I would never suggest that Mahler and Klemperer would sound identical as conductors.
Barry
-
But I would never suggest that Mahler and Klemperer would sound identical as conductors.
Nor would I! Especially since I have never heard Mahler conduct.
I will repeat, Klemperer was considered, during the 1930s an objective (dispassionate, detached) conductor, meaning that some felt he did not impose an emotional interpretation on the music. This was of course an opinion, whether you or I would agree with it or not. There are recordings of Klemperer from the era, so we can in fact make some judgment for ourselves--personally, I do find Klemperer's early recordings rather interpretively cool. Both Mahler and Klemperer (later, possibly earlier too) made alterations and unusual choices when they conducted (we only know this about Mahler from historical accounts---) I contend that Mahler--or probably any composer--would not likely be objective when conducting HIS OWN MUSIC...how could he be, if by objective we mean dispassionate and detached. According to accounts, this was not the case. If Klemperer became less detached, and more interventionist (making cuts, etc) that did move him closer to Mahler as a conductor, but it certainly doesn't make them identical, and again, no one is saying that they were.
-
"would not likely be objective when conducting HIS OWN MUSIC...how could he be, if by objective we mean dispassionate and detached"
To me, "objective" would mean following the indications in the score as closely as possible. To me, "dispassionate" and "detached" are subjective observations on the listener's part. I'm willing to bet that there were moments when even Mahler could appear dispassionate and detached with his own music. But that's not really an important point because we don't have evidence either way; and, "d. & d." are simply observations on the listener's part anyway. I think it's interesting that on Mahler's own piano rolls, he played the final stanzas of the fourth movement of the 4th symphony much quicker than most people do. So did Bruno Walter; probably wanting to follow the wishes of the composer. Is that "objective" or "subjective"? I would call that objective, because it comes from the source. What Mahler was depicting was a boy's view of what it's like to sit around in heaven, and not some comfortable songfest to make some fat (or skinny) soprano look and sound cozy. The singer and harp player need to adapt to what the music is depicting, and by whom (and not the other way around!). From all accounts, this would be very much in line with Mahler's approach to opera. He was not interested in making beautiful sounding singers feel comfortable. Instead, the singers and orchestra were made to adapt to what it was that the text and drama were depicting. I'd say that that's pretty darn objective, assuming that one understands the text and drama really well. Certainly, this is why his Wagner was so universally praised, whether in Vienna or New York.
Yes, I agree that Klemperer was striving for "objectivity" in his earlier years. He was, generally speaking, a fast tempo conductor when it came to the standard Austro-German classics. My understanding was that both Stravinsky and Schoenberg had some reservations about him conducting their music; but that they both, by and large, approved of his efforts. I very much like his recording of the Stravinsky "Symphony in 3 Movements", even though that comes from his late Philharmonia period.
So, in many ways, I think that we're both agreeing on a number of things, but are simply looking at the usage of the word "objective" differently. I think that Klemperer's Mahler 7th is good at "texture" type issues (dynamics; balances; clarity of line; coloristic effects, etc.). But at those glacial tempi, it bloody well ought to be! I still think that the old Penguin Guides - which I loath - came up with a great description when they said it was like listening to "Elektra" in slow motion. My only contention is that - and if it were possible to prove, I'd bet great money on it! - is that Klemperer would have conducted it considerably faster in his earlier years. Certainly Mahler's own timings were considerably shorter, and Klemperer was there at the premiere in Prague. It doesn't really matter whether we call that subjective or objective, the differences in timings remain quite stark. I would bet a huge amount of money that Klemperer wouldn't have dared to try his glacial tempi in front of Mahler! But that's a moot point.
-
I'm not trying to rain on your parade. In the end, one can believe whatever they want; either the performance speaks to you, or it doesn't. But there's plenty of written biographical material - eyewitness accounts - that can substantiate that Klemperer was literally falling asleep at some of his very last recording sessions.
Although he did record The Flying Dutchman around the same time which is one of his more dramatic recordings.
-
Hey the M7 was my obsession and subject for Bachelor Thesis- after also considering it my least favorite Mahler work years ago; after listeining to everything I could (cds, broadcast recordings, concerts etc) I have found a wonderful favorite, and wish to share it here. I have posted it up on my blog, since it is not commercially available (made the cover myself :P) :
http://statework.blogspot.com/2008/12/mahler-seventh-that-recalls-its.html (http://statework.blogspot.com/2008/12/mahler-seventh-that-recalls-its.html)
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_g8sohj-d7Z0/ST7EnGzJJFI/AAAAAAAAAFY/-Sp9MyYFajM/s1600-h/Mahler7AbbadoJO1999cover.jpg)
-
Just curious: of the two predecessors, which do you think comes closer to the Jugendorchester performance?