gustavmahlerboard.com
General Category => Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions => Topic started by: akiralx on September 05, 2009, 01:06:26 AM
-
http://www.sa-cd.net/showreviews/6088#6656
-
Looks very promising 8).
I didn't know it was already released.
What are the timings like? ???
John,
-
I sampled the audio clips on the BIS website and find them to my liking. It was a high level recording so I could hear lots of details as the reviewer said.
John,
-
The otherwise intelligent reviewer notes that "At the end of the score, you will be very aware that it was written by a man who was dying, knew that he was, and was none too happy about it."
And the myth goes on.
Of course, Mahler knew that he would die. Everyone does. He had plenty of experience with death as he grew up. But he was not bemoaning his fate in the Ninth. And he had no expectation of dying soon. Remember that he did not die of heart failure of any kind, as so often implied if not stated. He died of bacterial infection of the heart lining--subacute bacterial endocarditis, which ran its course briefly before being diagnosed in late February 1911. (See Herny-Louis de La Grange's Volume IV, page 1226 forward.)
It is not as if nobody knew until de La Grange's book was published. The actual cause of Mahler's death has been known and written about for several years. But the myth continues.
. & '
-
Looks very promising 8).
I didn't know it was already released.
What are the timings like? ???
John,
I. 26'41
II. 15'03
III. 13'07
IV. 26'27
Longer than 80min of SACD on ???a single disc??
-
David Hurwitz gives it a 10/10 rating.
http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=12455
-
David Hurwitz gives it a 10/10 rating.
http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=12455
Wow...I'm gonna have to hear this...just put my order in!
--Todd
-
http://www.classicstoday.com/review.asp?ReviewNum=12455
This is a stunning recording of Mahler's Ninth, surely one of the luckiest pieces on disc. Broadly speaking, Alan Gilbert's conception resembles Kurt Masur's New York Philharmonic recording in that his first movement is a bit swifter than usual, and the finale a touch slower (26 minutes each). This works very well: it gives the opening additional flow and a real "quick movement" drama, even though the basic tempo never sounds rushed. Gilbert characterizes every moment superbly: the bell-like solos for harp, the snarling stopped horns, and the soft percussion. The big climax before the final collapse is marvelously shaped, a huge ritard followed by a terrifying plunge over the cliff.
The finale, by contrast, surges onward majestically but inexorably, rising to another volcanic climax, while the islands of stillness in between statements of the main theme are beautifully sculpted, with particularly sensitive attention to dynamics. Much of the extra time that the movement takes gets spent in the coda, very slow and very soft, the music's final disintegration minutely controlled and all the more affecting as a result.
Gilbert's view of the two inner movements is refreshing: they are both, in their different ways, swift and exciting. The three dances in the second movement are well-differentiated, the drunken waltz reaching particularly giddy heights. Gilbert doesn't shirk the vulgarity that Mahler builds into the music, but he doesn't exaggerate it either. The Rondo: Burleske is one of the most exciting performances on disc, the relentless accelerations after the slower central interlude driving the music mercilessly forward to its maniacal conclusion. Kudos to the excellent players of the RSPO, who stay with Gilbert every step of the way.
Indeed the playing throughout really is exceptional. The horns, strings, and solo winds are all excellent. Only the first trumpet disappoints slightly, not on account of the playing as such, but simply because of a relative lack of prominence at a couple of points (thankfully not at the climaxes). Superb sonics make this the Mahler Ninth of choice if you want SACD surround-sound, and getting the whole 82 minutes of music on a single disc makes this a bargain too. Mahler collectors surely will want to hear this recording right away, but less specialized collectors also should give it serious consideration as a prime choice among available Ninths.
--David Hurwitz
(NOTE: THREAD TITLE CORRECTED BY MODERATOR)
-
See: http://gustavmahlerboard.com/forum/index.php?topic=970.msg8622#msg8622
-
I know cilea. I just wish to highlight this absolutely amazing rating :) Congratulations Mr.Gilbert
-
Sorry, but I have to differ on this one, fiercely :-[ :-\.
If you like M9th relentless, gut-wrenching, heady, one-dimensional, and in great sound & playing, it may be for you.
Even then, I'd choose Kubelik's similar recording on DG from the 60's over the Gilbert.
Besides, I need a lot more than what Mr. Gilbert provides here ;).
John,
-
Rating: 3 out of 4 stars.
A test case for the new conductor of the New York Philharmonic, but not in New York, October 2, 2009
By Santa Fe listener - See all my reviews
(TOP 100 REVIEWER)
So far as I can tel, every note that Alan Gilbert has conducted with the NY PHil. has been rapturously greeted by the local press, especially the Times. He is the orchestra's new face. He arrives to reinvigorate the orchestra after the dispiriting tenure of Lorin Maazel. And he's a native son of the city. There's every reason to give him the benefit of the doubt. But eventually gilbert has to offer the goods musically and show that he's the major conductor the orchestra deserves. Since his track record in recordings has been all but invisible, this new Mahler Ninth is the first evidence yea or nay about his talents. Therefore, I anticipated it highly.
Gilbert, now 42, has been the chief conductor in Stockholm since 2000, and the good news is that he holds a firm hand over the orchestra and gets them to respond. One senses his confidence with this complex score. As it happens, the NY phil's in-house label has just issued a complete Mahler cycle under Maazel, and if his lackluster Ninth, which shows not a shred of conviction, reminds us of how bad tings got, Gilbert's Mahler is energetic and engaging. But it's also painted broadly, with generic gestures and generic ideas. The first movement's opening theme is a thing of light and shadow, but Gilbert marches through it at a simple, straightforward pace with no bohter one way or other. Part of this literalness may be due to his musicians, who are goodish European players of no real distinciton. Listening to the many woodwind solos Mahler has written, none are executed with personality or style. The notes are played, and that's that.
Gilbert offers no real changes in dramatic contrast or even pacing as this complex movement unfolds. Like Seiji Ozawa, who couldn't seem to figure out what to say in the Ninth (this symphony figured as his farrewell to Boston ad was not a fortunate event), Gilbrt engages with the music's emotion by fits and starts. The great eruptions in the first movement are vivid but not wrenching. One hears a Mahlerian who is musically assured but self-contained. Simon Rattle's recent Ninth from Berlin (EMI) could be accused of fussiness, but it had more galvanizing impact than this reading.
Not everyone expects Mahler to be played with intensity, but it has to be characteristic. In the Scherzo there's enormous latitude for parody, irony, the clash of rustic and sophisticated (Rattle said of the two inner movements that this one exemplified everything Mahler hated about the country, while the Ronddo-Burleske exemplified everything he hated about the city). Gilbert is merely efficient. Perhaps that will satisfy some listeners, since he is "positive," as the British like to say about upbeat music-making. The Rondo-Burleske proceeds in the same vein, with lots of quick, efficient gestures but no menace or irony. By this point you will know where you stand abut the performance as a whole. Michael Tilson Thomas has won praise for his detailed, elegant, one-dimensional way with Mahler, and gilbert seems to be on the same track.
Happily, the Adagio finale begins with more gravity and weight; at 27 min. it's a true Adagio and actually slower by a minute than Bernstein in Berlin (DG). For the first time I felt that we were fully in Mahler's world. Gilbert's control over the massed string section is impressive, with a full range of dynamics as the half-lights of the long elegy are revealed. The challenge in this movement is to sustain an inward emotion for almost half an hour. Gilbert sustains the line even when the music becomes soft; the fact that he never lets the melody slacken is the sign of a naturally gifted conductor.
In sum, I can hear that Gilbert, although by no means a major Mahlerian yet, belongs in the ranks of international conductors for his control, musicianship, and sensitivity. For me, his Ninth didn't catch fire until the last movement, and I wish Gilbert had found more drama and depth elsewhere. However, New York may have bet on the right horse over the long stretch. They deserve a change of fortune.
P.S. I copied it from amazon.com. Basically, this reviewer has spoken for me so well (except for the negative opinion on Ozawa's Mahler) and I don't need to say any more. Is he one of us on the board?
-
I generally find my preferences to be opposite those of Santa Fe Listener. Not that he is wrong; we just seem to like different things. I usually find that if he (or she) does not like the recording, I probably will. I sometimes order a recording based on SFL's negative review.
-
I generally find my preferences to be opposite those of Santa Fe Listener. Not that he is wrong; we just seem to like different things. I usually find that if he (or she) does not like the recording, I probably will. I sometimes order a recording based on SFL's negative review.
I guess the problem you may run into in this case is that his review is neither enthusiastic nor too negative. I mean, he gave 3/4 after all. So, if you follow your instinct applying the "inverse of his rating",
1 -> 4
2 -> 3
3 -> 2
4 -> 1
you will get 2 out of 4 stars for this recording which is even more negative than the original!! ;D :D ;)
Just kidding.....
John,
-
I like it.
-
A couple of reasons this recording sounds so attractive right now:
--Suberb sonics...in the M9, sonics with clarity is always fun to listen to, regardless of tempos.
--Performance fits on a single disk.
I will try the Nott M9 as well.
Been a good year for Mahler fans.
--Todd
-
I just downloaded the Gilbert from Napster for only $0.95 after some mp3 credits were applied--and so far I like it.
-
On first impression I have not enjoyed the Gilbert M9 as much as I thought I might...I didn't even make it to the adagio so can't completely comment on the arc of the whole performance, so I will try again later. The sound quality in the treble sounded "glassy" or bright, and I winced all the way through (SACD layer). The execution is great no doubt, and I love the detail heard in the orchestration. The third climax in the 1st movement is wonderful in impact. But I guess I prefer slower tempos overall for this work, otherwise it sounds like "Mahler-lite" like the 2 middle movements sound here. I will return to it when I am in the mood for a faster M9.
:'(
--Todd
-
On first impression I have not enjoyed the Gilbert M9 as much as I thought I might...I didn't even make it to the adagio so can't completely comment on the arc of the whole performance, so I will try again later. The sound quality in the treble sounded "glassy" or bright, and I winced all the way through (SACD layer). The execution is great no doubt, and I love the detail heard in the orchestration. The third climax in the 1st movement is wonderful in impact. But I guess I prefer slower tempos overall for this work, otherwise it sounds like "Mahler-lite" like the 2 middle movements sound here. I will return to it when I am in the mood for a faster M9.
:'(
--Todd
Todd,
Looks like you're getting into my mode ;) :). I said repeatedly that Gilbert's reading lacks subtlety (except for certain parts in Finale). That includes 'poignancy', 'nuance', and even 'charm'. Take the Landler movt. for instance. I don't find much charm in his reading here. It's all executed mechanically. Sure, Barenboim took a similar approach at a more swift tempo but he knew how to avoid generating monotonic, one-dimensional tone by differentiating tempos and dynamics and doing other things. A part of this problem with the Gilbert is, as Todd indicated, originates from the cold digital sound that tends to push the upper limit too much creating the unpleasant shrillness and glassiness. Don't you folks catch this? After a while it will start hurting your ears. It definitely did to mine :-[ :-\.
John,
-
Sorry John, but I think that you're way off the deep end on this one. Just can't agree with you here.
-
Barry,
You know how picky I am when it comes to M9th just as you are when it comes to M8th :) ;).
Like I said I was very impressed with the playing and to a large extent the sound quality of the Gilbert M9th and hence would give it 8/9 rating. It's just that I don't feel much depth in his reading. I also said that a part of this may be due to the digital recording which tends to push up making the high end too prominent and harsh.
That's my point.
Cheers :D.
John,
-
Indeed! I think John's review is favorable over all, except for what he states regarding the depth of the reading and the sound quality (which I hear too)...but if you desire accurate suburb playing itself...this one is still a winner.
As for me, I'll be coming back to this recording in due time, as I still love the playing and recording detail. I have a feeling this one will grow on me with enough time.
--Todd
-
Sorry John, but I think that there's a world of difference between saying that something is poor because it's "too generalized", and my not liking the MTT/SFSO Mahler 8, for example, because of several very objective and indisputable facts, such as there being waaaay too little organ (when Mahler specifies fortissimo with the added words "volles werke"), as well as MTT taking the Adagissimo passage in Part II too slow by half, because he's conducting it in an extremely slow 4/4, when, in fact, he's supposed to remain in cut-time (half note gets the beat). It's an Adagissimo in cut-time, not 4/4. The melody is written in half-notes, not quarter-notes. This is basic Conducting 101 stuff. I don't see the same blatant problems with Gilbert's M9.
-
Barry,
I like the Finale and the central slow portion of III. in the Gilbert M9th very much. Because of this I am willing to give it 9/9 rating but please don't expect more from me :-\ ;).
You know, John Kim lives and dies with Mahler Ninth!
As for the MTT's M8th, overall I like the recording despite all the (valedictory) quibbles we have made because there are many strengths that ultimately outweigh the weaknesses. I think DH's 8/8 rating was appropriate, although I'd have given 8/9.
Regards,
John,
-
"there are many strengths that ultimately outweigh the weaknesses"
I strongly disagree with that. I'll take your Schwarz/Seattle Mahler 8 over this one anyday.
-
Man, this reminds me I still have to buy the MTT M8...soon I promise!
--Todd
-
I'm guessing that you'll like it OK. For that type of performance - slow, and sounding as though it came from a hundred different takes - I really prefer the Boulez, even though that one has no organ either (but a great sounding little chamber organ for the harmonium part). I think the singers are just as good on the Boulez (the tenor is clearly better!), and I think he has just as many interesting insights that pop out at such slow tempi. And even though Boulez ignores Mahler's "etwas draengend" marking at the end of Part I (somewhat sped-up), I love how he makes the end of Part I sound so grand and noble. I'm not even going to keep the MTT/SFSO one, as there just isn't anything in it for me. If I want to listen to great singers - and again, A. Dean Griffey is no great shakes under MTT - I'll go put on one of the old, classic recordings of "IL Trovatore" (actually, the Kubelik 8th is the best sung one of them all).
But for me, the Schwarz one just sounds soooooo natural, and it doesn't sound like it was edited from a boat-load of different takes. The organ is sufficient, and I love how you can hear the ascending/descending eighth-note runs from the offstage brass at the end of Part I - something that you can rarely hear clearly. I know, I know; his singers aren't the best. But hey, I wish they'd just go sing from the next county anyway.
This is supposed to be about M9, so I'm getting waaaay off-topic.
-
I'm guessing that you'll like it OK. For that type of performance - slow, and sounding as though it came from a hundred different takes - I really prefer the Boulez, even though that one has no organ either (but a great sounding little chamber organ for the harmonium part). I think the singers are just as good on the Boulez (the tenor is clearly better!), and I think he has just as many interesting insights that pop out at such slow tempi.
But for me, the Schwarz one just sounds soooooo natural, and it doesn't sound like it was edited from a boatload of different takes. The organ is sufficient, and I love how you can hear the ascending/descending eighth-note runs from the offstage brass at the end of Part I. I know, I know; his singers aren't the best. Hey, I wish they'd just sing their parts from the next county anyway.
I think I'll listen to the Schwartz M8 tomorrow, since now I'm ready to hear the 8th again...I'm feeling so much better from being sick, I think the M8 is in order for my next listen!!
--Todd
-
OK John; well, I do think that an 8/9 or 9/9 rating for the A. Gilbert Mahler 9 is quite fair. After all, there have been a whole slough of fine Mahler 9 recordings over the years. Personally, I would give it a 9/10, as I really like the sound quality. I also like how the movements are proportioned for a single disc 9th.
Strangely enough, I have the same problem with the Nott M9 as you do with the Gilbert M9: I just can't "get into it", and I find the sound quality a bit of a hindrance. I guess that's why we choices in the world.
-
I picked up the new Gilbert CD from an ebay seller for a good price. I've listened to it through a couple times on my Zune. I have no complaints with the tempi and overall pacing by the maestro, in fact I may like it best compared to other one-disc M9s that I retain (Masur, Gielen, Mund, Abbado). The winds and strings are very appealling. As a horn player I feel like I'm sitting in the section (actually, maybe too close).
What I did notice, however, were the low brass and percussion were sometimes insufficiently prominent, I think unnaturally recessed in the overall sound scape. Places in other recordings that I specifically enjoyed trombones or tuba belting out the terror sometimes are too restrained in this one. I'd question my assessment of what is correct prominence, possibly having been influenced by too many studio performances, except that just a few weeks ago I attended a live M9 performance and these voices were unmistakable at the appropriate times.
Juxtapose this case of 'mitigated' back row with the instances when the creaking (of a chair) and breathing (concert master or conductor?) are evident (e.g. the last minute or two of Movement I) and it leads me to believe the perspective of the recording is intentionally very much from the podium. Subsequently I've listened to samples of Masur, Lopez-Cobos, Abbado, Bertini, and Mund to confirm my assessment.
I believe i made the same observation, that the trombones weren't adequately miked, about the recent Schwartz M6. I wonder if this is a trend.
-
Here is Tony Duggan's review of the Gilbert M9th which is pretty negative for the most part :-X :'(:
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2009/Nov09/Mahler9_BISSACD1710.htm
John,
-
Whatever. You're all nuts. :P
-
Whatever. You're all nuts. :P
Hey, me?? ??? I didn't write the review ::) After all, I gave 8/9 rating ???:)
John,
-
Nobody is saying that it's the greatest Mahler 9th ever to have happen. But it's a very good, single disc recording of the work, captured in very decent sound (at least to my ears). What is there to fuss so much over?
B.
-
I have returned to the Gilbert M9 today, and finally I am succumbing to it's overall tone and impact...I'm starting to really like it, even the sound quality is better than my first impression. I guess I just needed more time with it.
Highlights:
The 1st and 3rd climaxes in I.
The whole Rondo, especially the slower reflective section.
The climax and ending of the Adagio.
:D
--Todd
-
I've recently listened through both the Nott and Gilbert Mahler 9 recordings. The Nott isn't bad - it really isn't. It's just that it doesn't grab me any in particular way - it's sort of just there. On the other hand, the Gilbert one is - heaven forbid - so much more exciting in the first movement. And the Rondo-Burlesque is every bit as razor sharp as the R-B on the Bernstein/Concertgebouw M9. To me, Gilbert's Mahler 9 is just more distinctive than the Nott - it's a really well proportioned, single disc version of the work, captured in pretty darn good sound.
For me, the only real "interpretive" mistake that Gilbert makes, is that he simply takes the first waltz passage in the second movement too quickly. He should save room for the last waltz variant instead.
-
On the other hand, the Gilbert one is - heaven forbid - so much more exciting in the first movement.
That's precisely the problem I have with the Gilbert. Just "exciting" w/o much depth.
John,
-
I've now heard the commercial Nott. I promised my impression, so here it is. I think the live concert (the one I've mentioned before) is stronger, but this commercial release is still excellent. Nott is more intense, subtler than Gilbert. The thing is, Gilbert falls a little into the obvious superficial traps, and that's why he's at his best in the Adagio (the same was in the live concert in LA, which was much more impressive throughout -- maybe because the orchestra was better). It's interesting to compare the two (Nott and Gilbert) because both recordings are with smaller, somewhat provincial orchestras, so the comparison makes sense. I think Nott is more restrained, less obvious. Nott creates more drama with less noise. But I'm sure there will be many more Mahler 9th in the coming two years and in superb sound. Would be good to hear Honeck's or Ivan Fischer's.
On the other hand, the Gilbert one is - heaven forbid - so much more exciting in the first movement.
That's precisely the problem I have with the Gilbert. Just "exciting" w/o much depth.
John,
-
I've now heard the commercial Nott. I promised my impression, so here it is. I think the live concert (the one I've mentioned before) is stronger, but this commercial release is still excellent. Nott is more intense, subtler than Gilbert. The thing is, Gilbert falls a little into the obvious superficial traps, and that's why he's at his best in the Adagio (the same was in the live concert in LA, which was much more impressive throughout -- maybe because the orchestra was better). It's interesting to compare the two (Nott and Gilbert) because both recordings are with smaller, somewhat provincial orchestras, so the comparison makes sense. I think Nott is more restrained, less obvious. Nott creates more drama with less noise. But I'm sure there will be many more Mahler 9th in the coming two years and in superb sound. Would be good to hear Honeck's or Ivan Fischer's.
These are some excellent thoughts...I agree it is fascinating to compare these two releases. I spent my last two days off comparing the Nott and Gilbert and feel both performances compliment each other for the reasons you described. Also, the sound quality is pristine for both and the details of each are rewarding to listen and ponder. It is also fascinating to compare the various Japanese orchestras on Exton and Fontec.
The Gilbert is definitely more exciting in the first movement, and the Nott is intense in a subtle manner...both work for me...and it is nice to be spoiled by all these choices. Also, Nott and Gilbert hold their own against the Rattle/BPO (my top choice) and many reviewers say they surpass the Rattle, and this is impressive indeed.
--Todd
-
The problem with too much depth in the first movement is that it doesn't leave room for the rest of the piece. The remaining three movement simply aren't anywhere as good. You may as well play it as a single movement, unfinished symphony. Seriously, THAT's the problem.
-
You're probably right. Although -- compared with the 1st, 4th, 6th, 7th and Das Lied von der Erde (maybe even the 5th) -- the 9th possibly isn't as innovative, original and as full of ideas at every twist and turn. Although a lot of people prefer the 9th, maybe precisely because it's less "revolutionary"?? Of course that's only my view, but all new 9's are far less exciting to me. There is just not much there to screw up, or -- even more importantly -- to dig in and find new treasures. With every really good 1st or 6th or 7th I still do get excited every time. With Das Lied von der Erde for example there is so much to screw up that even with all the available recordings and broadcasts, the really profound ones can be counted with one hand.
The problem with too much depth in the first movement is that it doesn't leave room for the rest of the piece. The remaining three movement simply aren't anywhere as good. You may as well play it as a single movement, unfinished symphony. Seriously, THAT's the problem.
-
You're probably right. Although -- compared with the 1st, 4th, 6th, 7th and Das Lied von der Erde (maybe even the 5th) -- the 9th possibly isn't as innovative, original and as full of ideas at every twist and turn. Although a lot of people prefer the 9th, maybe precisely because it's less "revolutionary"?? Of course that's only my view, but all new 9's are far less exciting to me. There is just not much there to screw up, or -- even more importantly -- to dig in and find new treasures. With every really good 1st or 6th or 7th I still do get excited every time. With Das Lied von der Erde for example there is so much to screw up that even with all the available recordings and broadcasts, the really profound ones can be counted with one hand.
It's the opposite for me...with the exception of the M6 and DLVDE I'm only excited about the M9 these days...I enough have great performances of the other works! I can only afford to collect one symphony and that's the M9. I also feel the M9 has more to offer and has more ideas than Mahler's other completed works, except for the M3, and DLvDE. ;D
--Todd
-
yes, but the first movement is so great that it can easily overshadow the rest of it. Also, there are plenty of recordings where the performers simply could not keep up the same level of intensity from start to finish. In a way, I think the Ninth is a very draining work.
Anyway, to take this in yet another obtuse direction, I think the Eji Oue M9 (Exton or Canyon) has more character and interest to it than the Nott. That's just me.
-
yes, but the first movement is so great that it can easily overshadow the rest of it. Also, there are plenty of recordings where the performers simply could not keep up the same level of intensity from start to finish. In a way, I think the Ninth is a very draining work.
Anyway, to take this in yet another obtuse direction, I think the Eji Oue M9 (Exton or Canyon) has more character and interest to it than the Nott. That's just me.
Yeah, the first movement of the 9 often overshadows the rest, I agree there. This element keeps me interested to see who can overcome this potential problem. Sometimes this happens to the M3 as well. Mahler seems to really challange music directors with some of his works...the M3, M7, M8 and M9 seem to really be difficult in this regard.
My favorite M9's are those that are the exception. Here I site the usual suspects...Lenny and Karajan...Lets face it, you really just need these guys if you only want a few recordings. BUT Bertini, MTT, Rattle and Haitink are incredible for me personally...and there are others that I forget at the moment. But I'm a completist geek over the M9.
As an aside I will say I could probably live with JUST the Bertini box from EMI if I had to sell everything god forbid...but more on that another time.
I do have one quibble regarding Mahler's plan for his 9. I have to admit to having a problem with the second movement...okay there I said it. Whew...I feel better now. It takes a special performance to grab me with the second movement...most recently the Rattle and now the Gilbert. I also love what Bertini does in the second movement.
Oue is definitely more characterful than the Nott, I can't argue with you there. Oue even makes that second movement a kind of emotional purging nearly equal in wieght to the first movement. Oue makes the other movements very memorable without getting too into hysterics or dragging tempos...he somehow keeps the whole thing together and interesting even though the second movement almost moves into late Klemp territory..almost too much!
My love for Nott is something I can't put into words yet, except to say it sounds autumnal and in a certain way sounds like late Brahms chamber music.
--Todd
-
I just got the Gilbert M9 today but havent listened to it yet, i just wanted to respond to the comment about the 1st movement overshadowing the rest, im 34 now, when i 1st bought my 1st M9 recording i was 23 and it was the 1st Karajan recording from the 70's, i then went on to get the Karajan live 82, the 2nd Abbado recording, and now the Nott and Gilbert. I did get the 1st rattle recording but i just cant stand Rattle in Mahler, Sibelius yes but not Mahler. When 1st gettinginto the symphony the 1st movement did indeed for me completely overshadow the other 3 movements but now after getting into the Nott and being completely absorbed in it, the other 3 movements are now for me just as important and as great.
-
Quite right. To me, II-IV have never felt overshadowed by I. No way. No matter how the opening movt. is played, they are just as powerful, important, and great.
John,
-
What exactly did you like in the Oue M9? I thought it was cold and uneventful. I actually liked his LvdE for about 5 minutes a long-long time ago when I didn't know anything about Mahler and was kind of clueless about the piece. I don't mean to belittle your preferences. It's hard to agree on anything Mahler related. The thing about Mahler, I guess, is that everyone thinks HIS Mahler is the RIGHT Mahler and good men are willing to duel about their Mahler conviction at 6 am in the woods.
yes, but the first movement is so great that it can easily overshadow the rest of it. Also, there are plenty of recordings where the performers simply could not keep up the same level of intensity from start to finish. In a way, I think the Ninth is a very draining work.
Anyway, to take this in yet another obtuse direction, I think the Eji Oue M9 (Exton or Canyon) has more character and interest to it than the Nott. That's just me.
-
It's hard to agree on anything Mahler related. The thing about Mahler, I guess, is that everyone thinks HIS Mahler is the RIGHT Mahler and good men are willing to duel about their Mahler conviction at 6 am in the woods.
Which is why I stand by the Mahler performances that have stood the test of time, executed by conductors whose interpretations were recognized as authoritative. There are extremely few Mahler performances nowadays that stand out from all the rest. I'd rather let everyone else argue how each note or dynamic at a particular point in the score should be played by this or that conductor, and eventually there will be a winner, if any at all.
Wade
-
Oue 9: It's a lot like the Giulini, which is considered to be "a classic" by some. It has very powerful climaxes in the outer movements. And while the inner two movements are greatly under-tempo, they have a sort of strained, Berg-ian (as in Alban Berg), expressionistic quality that's very similar to how the inner movements sound on the Giulini. By the way, I don't consider Mahler 9 to be a "warm" piece of music. I'm not sure exactly what constitutes "hot" or "warm" or "cool" or "cold", etc.; but Mahler 9 doesn't exactly give me the warm fuzzies to begin with. Anyway, I actually think the Oue one is better played than the Giulini. It's certainly better recorded.
-
I agree with you about Giulini. But I don't hear the parallels with Oue. Maybe in tempos? (I haven't checked) but not in atmosphere. And don't get hung up on "cold". I don't mean that M9 is warm in the fuzzy sense, but it is a large scale, romantic, expressive, full-bodied, expansive symphony (I don't hear Alban Berg in the 9th -- more in the 6th or 7th). I do hear all that large scale monumental volcano in the Giulini, but the Oue is more minimalistic and "clean". This is all from memory though, so more importantly, you've intrigued me to re-listen to both. I'll be happy to revisit it at a later stage.
-
Oue 9: It's a lot like the Giulini, which is considered to be "a classic" by some. It has very powerful climaxes in the outer movements. And while the inner two movements are greatly under-tempo, they have a sort of strained, Berg-ian (as in Alban Berg), expressionistic quality that's very similar to how the inner movements sound on the Giulini. By the way, I don't consider Mahler 9 to be a "warm" piece of music. I'm not sure exactly what constitutes "hot" or "warm" or "cool" or "cold", etc.; but Mahler 9 doesn't exactly give me the warm fuzzies to begin with. Anyway, I actually think the Oue one is better played than the Giulini. It's certainly better recorded.
I agree.
Oue is not warm and fuzzy but he certainly is dramatic...the climaxes in the outer movements are among the loudest and agressive I've heard. I didn't hear a minimal quality but we all have different ideas on what that could mean...Oue's M9 is amazing to me anyway!
--Todd
-
Thanks for the tip on Oue. I've just listened to it again. The 1st movement is great and, like you say, has powerful contrasts and has a "Bergian" type, dark, intellectual quality. And yes, he continues with this in the inner movements, as he must, but they are long and dry and the concept doesn't hold (in the inner movements) for me. I don't hear the same style in the adagio though, it's quiet and resigned and zen-like, plus it's minimalistic and doesn't follow the intellectual, driven powerhouse of the first three. So after the first movement, the rest is pretty much a let down (for me). Anyway thanks. I"ll check out the Giulini again.