Recent Posts

61

Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions / Re: Bychkov/Czech Phil. M3 - I think this is a home run!

« Last post by Roland Flessner on March 16, 2025, 02:07:37 AM »

Giving Bychkov a second listen, this is a very good recording. However, the upper woodwinds in particular are recessed and would benefit from being more prominent. It is not a lack of character in the playing of the CPO musicians but a characteristic of the recording.

I just listened to the Nott/Bamberg M3--a live recording and I believe the only live one in the set--and it is outstanding. Sharp execution and SQ with presence and impact.

62

Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions / Re: Bychkov/Czech Phil. M3 - I think this is a home run!

« Last post by barryguerrero on March 14, 2025, 10:03:30 PM »

John, I promise you I'll get around to listing to the Chung/RCOA M9, but not until later this month, I'm afraid. I'm tied up with several different things going on for another 10 days.

63

Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions / Re: Bychkov/Czech Phil. M3 - I think this is a home run!

« Last post by John Kim on March 14, 2025, 06:17:11 PM »

Hi Roland,

Plz check my message sent to you.

John

64

Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions / Re: Bychkov/Czech Phil. M3 - I think this is a home run!

« Last post by John Kim on March 14, 2025, 06:22:34 AM »

Roland,

Every time I expressed my enthusiasm about a new recording online early on, he always ended up posting a negative review of the same recording. Were they coincidences? I may be wrong about this, but I don't think so. He might have posted his review after reading my postings. I kid you not!^ I will give you just three incidents:

1. Chung/SPO/DG M9th (his review is available on classicstoday.com)
2. Bruckner 0th Symphony for which I expressed my deep affection numerous times online. But he called it 'the worst Bruckner symphony' (on YouTube video)
3. Bychkov/CPO/Pentatone M3rd (on YouTube video)

In the case of Chung's M9th, I am dead certain he purposefully did IT. The review is not only unfair objectively it may even be perceived as insulting to the Korean artists.

Agreed on your description of Bychkov's M3rd. He must have given lots of thoughts before he tackled conducting and recording the work and it shows in every movement, every note. This is a very thoughtful reading with deep affection for the score. In my words, Bychkov's approach is 'grand in scale, minute in details', and that's pretty much all that is needed in performing the symphony. Speaking of the orchestra, who could play Mahler better than CPO?

John

65

Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions / Re: Bychkov/Czech Phil. M3 - I think this is a home run!

« Last post by Roland Flessner on March 14, 2025, 05:22:09 AM »

DH's dyspeptic review of the Bychkov M3 is basically a tantrum. I have a rule of thumb for online discourse: If you wouldn't say it to someone in person, maybe don't say it online either. Just imagine standing next to Maestro Bychkov, CPO musicians, or the recording team, and hurling the CD case to the floor while expressing disgust with their work. It's OK to express a strong opinion, but if you're infantile about it that says more about you than about whatever displeased you.

Listening again tonight, this time with the score, this is an outstanding recording. Bychkov maintains a narrative arc yet is attentive to Mahler's instructions and brings out a wealth of detail. It is not fussy or lacking in characterization. The recording is transparent and the CPO musicians play like gods. To my ears it's up there with the best.

66

Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions / Re: Bychkov/Czech Phil. M3 - I think this is a home run!

« Last post by barryguerrero on March 13, 2025, 07:11:11 PM »

I think the N. Jarvi Prokofiev 5 is good reading, but I also agree about that those Chandos recordings done with the SNSO. In England, they use the Paiste tam-tams, which I generally don't like at all. I agree that the Slatkin is excellent. I don't know Kitaenko one at all.

John, I agree with every comment you make, regarding the playback of the Bychkov M3. There's tons of detail and subtle nuances that can be heard. It's also NOT boring - it has forward propulsion in the right spots. For example, his build-up to the climax of the third movement is amazing (I'm not talking about the coda) - the climax that's between the two major soundings of the offstage posthorn (which is wonderfully done).

67

Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions / Re: Bychkov/Czech Phil. M3 - I think this is a home run!

« Last post by John Kim on March 13, 2025, 06:10:02 AM »

Roland,

DH's top choice for Prokofiev 5th is Jarvi/SNO? I thought he really liked Karajan/BPO/DG? Yes, Chandos gave Jarvi sound that's way too artificially reverberant and echoey eschewing details.

John

68

Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions / Re: Bychkov/Czech Phil. M3 - I think this is a home run!

« Last post by Roland Flessner on March 13, 2025, 05:43:00 AM »

John, I just recall, as an example, DH making a survey of numerous recordings of the Prokofiev Fifth and declaring Neeme Järvi's to be his top choice. While I have a lot of respect for Järvi I find the SNO Chandos recordings hard to listen to: artificially reverberant, acidic, and sibilant. DH praised the tamtam toward the end of the first movement, but it's one of those shallow instruments that just sounds like a big cymbal, with no depth or complexity. Few recordings convey the power of that music but Slatkin/SLSO and Kitaenko/Gürzenich, for example, are so, so much better.

One could almost turn his recommendations upside down. If he doesn't like it, give it a fair chance; if he does, run away.

69

Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions / Re: Bychkov/Czech Phil. M3 - I think this is a home run!

« Last post by John Kim on March 13, 2025, 04:12:32 AM »

Roland,

LOL!!^^

I hope I'm wrong about this, but it looks as though my reaction and his reaction to a new recording always seem - to borrow from Quantum Mechanics - 'entangled' each other. That is, if I like a recording I know immediately that he will dislike it, and vice versa. I am afraid hat's the feeling I had up until I saw his video review finally surfaced today. AND I was right!^

One really needs to turn the volume up to appreciate Bychkov's way with the score fairly and objectively. This is not only because Pentatone's recorded level is rather low (yes, you need to ramp the volume up!) but also there are so many subtleties and nuances in his reading as well as in the orchestra's execution that are worth paying extra attention. On a casual listening and at a low volume, these things won't come off well. I am surprised that a critic like DH who I thought were very keen on hearing small details and textural differences failed to capture them, notice them.

John

70

Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions / Re: Bychkov/Czech Phil. M3 - I think this is a home run!

« Last post by Roland Flessner on March 13, 2025, 03:04:12 AM »

So rarely do I find DH's reviews sensible that I am tempted to suspect that he is an AI-generated persona engineered to annoy normal people.

In this instance, I will quote an old friend. Let's call it J's Maxim: "The vehemence with which a view is expressed is inversely proportional to the chances of it being useful or helpful."