gustavmahlerboard.com
General Category => Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions => Topic started by: barry guerrero on January 25, 2007, 08:03:00 PM
-
By the way, the 3rd was the one Brahms symphony that Mahler conducted most in concert. Here goes:
JOHANNES BRAHMS
Symphony No. 3; Haydn Variations
London Philharmonic Orchestra
Marin Alsop
Naxos- 8.557430(CD)
Reference Recording - Symphony: Wand (RCA); Levine (RCA); Walter (Sony); Dohnanyi (Teldec)
Marin Alsop's recordings of Brahms' first two symphonies were good, at times very good, but not great. In particular, for all her basic musicality, the performances lacked a certain element of excitement, never mind actual risk-taking. So my expectations for this Third, the toughest of them all to conduct, were not that high. After all, some really great Brahmsians, including Toscanini and Furtwängler, have really screwed up this symphony. The latter's performances especially constitute some of the most hideously embarrassing documents ever left by a theoretically great artist. Indeed, in the entire history of the work on disc, there have been perhaps seven or eight truly great performances: Walter (Sony, stereo), Levine (RCA), Wand (his first one with NDR, on RCA), Klemperer (EMI), Jochum (EMI, with this orchestra), Dohnanyi (Warner/Teldec), and perhaps most surprisingly, Solti (Decca).
To this select list, add Alsop. This is not a judgment made lightly, but this is one hell of a fine performance of this most elusive symphony, perhaps closest in character to Dohnanyi's Cleveland version. It's interesting to note the dearth of German or central European orchestras in the above list, and this fact holds a clue to Alsop's success: her ability to keep the textures from becoming too heavy, and to keep Brahms' bass lines moving. Ordinarily, and particularly in the First and Fourth Symphonies, the typically dark, rich German bass is just the ticket, but not here. This symphony, with its obvious homage to Dvorák's Fifth in the same key, and its frequent recourse to syncopated rhythms in the middle registers of the orchestra, needs as much space around the notes as is consistent with lively tempos and well-sprung rhythms.
Part of the problem is of Brahms' own making. While the last three movements offer some of his finest orchestral writing, especially for the woodwinds, the first movement often comes across as a clogged-up mess. Conductors overcompensate for the lack of audible detail by playing the music too slowly. Alsop keeps the music moving, but also clarifies the underlying rhythm quite splendidly. As an example, consider the transition from the first to the second subject, and later on, the triplet accompaniments to the finale's heroic second subject. This is very good Brahms conducting: the tension never sags, no important details go unobserved (note the nicely touched-in contrabassoon just before the recapitulation), and nothing detracts from the evolving symphonic argument.
The Andante features beautifully blended wind playing in its serene outer sections and just the right touch of mystery in the central chorale. Alsop takes great care to observe the written dynamics, a big plus in the ensuing Poco Allegretto, which sounds so much better minus the usual excess of espressivo. Best of all, the finale is spectacular: swiftly exciting, with very present timpani and a tremendously explosive (but remarkably transparent) central climax. The coda captures that special, autumnal glow that Brahms builds into the scoring, but without sacrificing sufficient momentum to bring the work to a fulfilling (as opposed to a merely exhausted) conclusion.
The Haydn Variations makes an excellent coupling, and is equally well done. Alsop's excellent command of rhythm once again is very much in evidence, particularly in the Vivace fifth variation, and even without those darker, heavier bass lines the final passacaglia builds quite effortlessly to a joyous conclusion. Vividly detailed sonics seal the deal. The truth is that very few conductors manage to do all of the Brahms symphonies equally well, which is why the modern tendency to do them in fours is such a pity. This effort bodes well for the conclusion of Alsop's cycle, but at the same time it will be a tough act to follow. I hope she can do it; in the meantime, I'm more than happy to recommend this superb new recording as strongly as possible.
--David Hurwitz
-
Let's not overload on Hurwitz reviews. ;)
-
I find it interesting, because I like the third best; and it might have been the one that Mahler liked the best as well. Also, Naxos is cheap. In short, what's not to like?
-
I find it interesting, because I like the third best; and it might have been the one that Mahler liked the best as well. Also, Naxos is cheap. In short, what's not to like?
Hurwitz's ref recs tells me where he's comin' from with this 10/10. Or, maybe it's the Naxos 10/10 quota that needs bumping.
-
I have no idea what you're getting at - neither do I care. If you don't like what I post, don't read it - pure and simple.
-
I have no idea what you're getting at - neither do I care. If you don't like what I post, don't read it - pure and simple.
Now you're angry. That's fine. Just don't be snarky. Anyway, it's not that simple. You serve up three factions as most do. Likes, dislikes, indifferents. And depending on if it's a slow news day, comments might arrive for all.
-
I bought the Bohm/Vienna boxset of symphonies and feel they equal Klemperer's. I love the way the 3rd begins, brilliant powerful opening, and the slow movement with the middle climax, best with good bass. It is one of my favorite symphonies, but it is actually recorded far less often then his 1st.
-
Well, I'm a big Brahms fan. The 1st and 4th are among my favorite symphonies by any composer, and I like the 3rd well enough. On the other hand, I've never really understood the interest in the 2nd symphony. There seem to be truckloads of recordings of it, but I just don't care for it much.
I have been terribly disappointed at the quality of Brahms symphonies available on SACD. The box set by Bychkov is mediocre. Haitink is stolid and boring. Marin Alsop's recording of Brahms 1st on SACD was lackluster, uninspired, routine. There's really nothing there. And since I don't really care for the 2nd that much, I didn't buy her recording of it.
Robert Levine also had good things to say about this 3rd. But the CD will not hit the shelves in the U.S. until Jan 30. I don't see an SACD version listed for pre-order. I'm not sure it will ever appear in SACD format. I think I remember that Naxos shut down its SACD program. (Many of their SACDs were really ugly audio-wise and as a result, their SACDs were not selling well. The audio of the Alsop Brahms 1 was actually pretty good -- better than the performance.)
So, then the question becomes, is this performance of Brahms 3 good enough to deserve a place on the shelf beside the great recordings on redbook CD? Well, at less than $10, I guess, even if it is not, I'm not out that much, and I can always toss the CD and re-use the jewel box if I really hate it. ;D
-
Marin Alsop is a great Brahmsian. I only have her B1 on Naxos so far and its the version I play most often. I also have Harnoncourt, Abbado and Haitink. I look forward to purchasing her B3 when it arrives in store here. Interestingly, DH didn't much like her B2 but Gramophone did. I might just buy that too, especially at the Naxos price.
-
Boris,
In all do respect, I had no idea - and still have no idea - what you are driving at. Are you implying that there's some shortcoming in Brahms recordings from Wand, Walter, Dohnanyi, and Levine? Are you possibly implying that this couldn't be great because it comes from a budget label? That it couldn't be great, because it's conducted by an up-start woman? That Hurwitz is wrong because he doesn't see it your way? Do you really believe that there's a such a thing as a "Naxos 10/10 quota" at Classicstoday? How are we to interpret what you spout off? I can assure you, there is no such thing as a 10/10 quota for any label with Classicstoday? Second, I'm far more likely to believe that D.H.'s 10/10 review is closer to the truth than your out-of-hand dismissal of something that - once again - you haven't listened to.
Am I angry? Yes, I suppose I am - I get angered when someone perpetually dismisses items that they themselves haven't listened to; especially when those dismissals aren't expressed in terms of having doubts, but in terms of being an absolute truth. That's called not listening, in more ways than one. I wouldn't expect you to cling on to what D.H. says here. But conversely, why would expect you me to take a liking to your out-of-hand dismissal with this preposterous beauty: "Or, maybe it's the Naxos 10/10 quota that needs bumping"? You can make any observation about me that you want, but this much I will always promise you, or anyone else: I don't dismiss or pump-up recordings that I haven't heard - period.
-
Now you're angry. That's fine. Just don't be snarky.
Boris:
I'm really not certain what you're driving at in this thread. If ANYONE is being snarky, it would seem to be you. You are not adding anything specific to the discussion in any of your various posts. Instead you are making general "put-downs" directed at Barry or others (which is not welcome), without making any attempt at real and/or specific criticism (which most certainly is welcome).
Classics Today reviews are very welcome on this site, as are reviews by other professionals, amateurs, and of course, forum members. If you have a specific criticism of the review, please chime in.
-
I bought the Bohm/Vienna boxset of symphonies and feel they equal Klemperer's. I love the way the 3rd begins, brilliant powerful opening, and the slow movement with the middle climax, best with good bass. It is one of my favorite symphonies, but it is actually recorded far less often then his 1st.
If I just had Bohm and Klemperer, I might like to reserve Bohm for 1 and 4, and Klemperer for 2 and 3. Both could take lessons, were they still alive, from Karajan's 4 from the '60's. All three are very successful with 1. Again, Karajan's 1 from the '60's.
-
Now you're angry. That's fine. Just don't be snarky.
Boris:
I'm really not certain what you're driving at in this thread. If ANYONE is being snarky, it would seem to be you. You are not adding anything specific to the discussion in any of your various posts. Instead you are making general "put-downs" directed at Barry or others (which is not welcome), without making any attempt at real and/or specific criticism (which most certainly is welcome).
Classics Today reviews are very welcome on this site, as are reviews by other professionals, amateurs, and of course, forum members. If you have a specific criticism of the review, please chime in.
I asked the question on the previous GM Board if Hurwitz was part-owner, since so many of his reviews appeared there. Nothing's changed. If you do not like the criticism of that, that is fine, but the criticism is not going to change as long as such narrow scope of reasoning is present. Of which you ironically accuse me of. I suggest you and your apparent sidelick bolster your glass houses.
-
Boris,
In all do respect, I had no idea - and still have no idea - what you are driving at. Are you implying that there's some shortcoming in Brahms recordings from Wand, Walter, Dohnanyi, and Levine? Are you possibly implying that this couldn't be great because it comes from a budget label? That it couldn't be great, because it's conducted by an up-start woman? That Hurwitz is wrong because he doesn't see it your way? Do you really believe that there's a such a thing as a "Naxos 10/10 quota" at Classicstoday? How are we to interpret what you spout off? I can assure you, there is no such thing as a 10/10 quota for any label with Classicstoday? Second, I'm far more likely to believe that D.H.'s 10/10 review is closer to the truth than your out-of-hand dismissal of something that - once again - you haven't listened to.
Am I angry? Yes, I suppose I am - I get angered when someone perpetually dismisses items that they themselves haven't listened to; especially when those dismissals aren't expressed in terms of having doubts, but in terms of being an absolute truth. That's called not listening, in more ways than one. I wouldn't expect you to cling on to what D.H. says here. But conversely, why would expect you me to take a liking to your out-of-hand dismissal with this preposterous beauty: "Or, maybe it's the Naxos 10/10 quota that needs bumping"? You can make any observation about me that you want, but this much I will always promise you, or anyone else: I don't dismiss or pump-up recordings that I haven't heard - period.
Just remember, it is never too late to have your Hurwitz umbilical cord cut.
-
Boris,
In all do respect, I had no idea - and still have no idea - what you are driving at. Are you implying that there's some shortcoming in Brahms recordings from Wand, Walter, Dohnanyi, and Levine? Are you possibly implying that this couldn't be great because it comes from a budget label? That it couldn't be great, because it's conducted by an up-start woman? That Hurwitz is wrong because he doesn't see it your way? Do you really believe that there's a such a thing as a "Naxos 10/10 quota" at Classicstoday? How are we to interpret what you spout off? I can assure you, there is no such thing as a 10/10 quota for any label with Classicstoday? Second, I'm far more likely to believe that D.H.'s 10/10 review is closer to the truth than your out-of-hand dismissal of something that - once again - you haven't listened to.
Am I angry? Yes, I suppose I am - I get angered when someone perpetually dismisses items that they themselves haven't listened to; especially when those dismissals aren't expressed in terms of having doubts, but in terms of being an absolute truth. That's called not listening, in more ways than one. I wouldn't expect you to cling on to what D.H. says here. But conversely, why would expect you me to take a liking to your out-of-hand dismissal with this preposterous beauty: "Or, maybe it's the Naxos 10/10 quota that needs bumping"? You can make any observation about me that you want, but this much I will always promise you, or anyone else: I don't dismiss or pump-up recordings that I haven't heard - period.
Just remember, it is never too late to have your Hurwitz umbilical cord cut.
Hey Boris, whats with the attitude?
-
Boris,
In all do respect, I had no idea - and still have no idea - what you are driving at. Are you implying that there's some shortcoming in Brahms recordings from Wand, Walter, Dohnanyi, and Levine? Are you possibly implying that this couldn't be great because it comes from a budget label? That it couldn't be great, because it's conducted by an up-start woman? That Hurwitz is wrong because he doesn't see it your way? Do you really believe that there's a such a thing as a "Naxos 10/10 quota" at Classicstoday? How are we to interpret what you spout off? I can assure you, there is no such thing as a 10/10 quota for any label with Classicstoday? Second, I'm far more likely to believe that D.H.'s 10/10 review is closer to the truth than your out-of-hand dismissal of something that - once again - you haven't listened to.
Am I angry? Yes, I suppose I am - I get angered when someone perpetually dismisses items that they themselves haven't listened to; especially when those dismissals aren't expressed in terms of having doubts, but in terms of being an absolute truth. That's called not listening, in more ways than one. I wouldn't expect you to cling on to what D.H. says here. But conversely, why would expect you me to take a liking to your out-of-hand dismissal with this preposterous beauty: "Or, maybe it's the Naxos 10/10 quota that needs bumping"? You can make any observation about me that you want, but this much I will always promise you, or anyone else: I don't dismiss or pump-up recordings that I haven't heard - period.
Just remember, it is never too late to have your Hurwitz umbilical cord cut.
Hey Boris, whats with the attitude?
:o
-
I asked the question on the previous GM Board if Hurwitz was part-owner, since so many of his reviews appeared there. Nothing's changed. If you do not like the criticism of that, that is fine, but the criticism is not going to change as long as such narrow scope of reasoning is present. Of which you ironically accuse me of. I suggest you and your apparent sidelick bolster your glass houses.
As I stated in my previous post, ALL reviews of Mahler performances (CD's, DVD's, live performances, etc.) are welcome here. If you find other reviews that you would like to paste into a thread, or would like to post your own personal review, please do so.
I am taking issue with your general and/or veiled put-downs. Do you not see the distinction between offering specific criticism and throwing out an insult?
-
I fear that some people just never really "get it," Scott. There is a basic netiquette that has been in existence since the beginnings of the internet -- it is fine to disagree and argue, even vehemently, with content, but it is never, ever appropriate to attack people. I don't always agree with Hurwitz, and I never hesitate to say so. But I do not condemn others for agreeing with him or posting his reviews.
Boris, if you disagree with the content of Hurwitz's review, feel free to counter with your own review or the points on which you disagree with him. I am not the moderator here, but I think it is out of line to attack other members. If you don't want to read reviews by Hurwitz, well ... don't read them! No one is forcing you to. If you prefer reviews by someone else, well ... post them! We may or may not agree with them, but we will not attack YOU for posting them.
It is a distinction of common courtesy, Boris.
-
Boris,
I was perfectly transparent in any previous inquiries regarding David Hurwitz. He is one of my best friends; I've known him for several decades - long before he ever thought of starting Classicstoday. It isn't his main source of income (far from it), and there are no monies being exchanged here what-so-ever. In fact, we live on opposite ends of the country now. I have nothing to do with Classicstoday.com. at this point. Conversely, D.H. has nothing to do with this site. For the most part, D.H. and I do have a similar outlook on orchestral music, and share similar tastes. I have disagreed with him in the past, but it is a rare occurance. Currently, I don't share his thoroughly negative opinion of the Norrington Mahler recordings. On that particular issue, you're more a kindred spirit with him than I - even though you actually haven't heard them. I've been pleasantly surprised by them, and find them quite interesting to listen to. Anyway, if it bothers you that I'm friends with D.H., or that I share many of the same opinions that he has, that's too bad! As I've said before, if you don't like what I write, don't read it! I like to post reviews of Naxos items because they're often times quite good, as well as being budget priced. Given your great interest in on-line rips of live performances, I'm sure you can appreciate inexpensive issues. Obviously, there are others here who seem perfectly glad that I had posted this particular Hurwitz review. You, yourself, chimed in quite positively about the Penderecki review. But what is even more ironic, is that there was absolutely no need for you to attack this review at all: I happen to share you enthusiasm for Brahms recordings conducted by Klemperer, Bohm, and Karajan (although, Karajan always left out the expo. repeat in Brahms 3). Frankly, Hurwitz likes those as well, particularly Klemperer, for whom he has a strong admiration for.
-
It is one of the hardest things to be a critic, as opinions are opinions, and they must try to generalize the best they can, quite daunting. I ended up buying this recording at Barnes and Noble, it was too cheap to pass up, plus Haydn Variations is one of my favorites.
-
Mistake, it was actually Szell's classic recording of Brahms' 1st which I ordered... :P
-
It is one of the hardest things to be a critic, as opinions are opinions, and they must try to generalize the best they can, quite daunting. I ended up buying this recording at Barnes and Noble, it was too cheap to pass up, plus Haydn Variations is one of my favorites.
Tell us what you think...I'm going to get it soon too.
-
It is one of the hardest things to be a critic, as opinions are opinions, and they must try to generalize the best they can, quite daunting. I ended up buying this recording at Barnes and Noble, it was too cheap to pass up, plus Haydn Variations is one of my favorites.
Funny, I went to BN with the intention of getting either this one or the Tennstedt M4/M8 combo using a xmas gift card. They did not have either in stock, but they did have the Solti/CSO/Brahms symphony set, which I have always wanted -- so I bought it instead!
-
I bought the Szell B1, I forgot which one I purchased ??? I also had a giftcard. I loath their selection sometimes; You can find rare things there often, but sometimes famous recordings simply aren't there >:(