revisit: early '80s Karajan M9 awfully hard to beat!

[waderice]

To me (and many others), the biggest issue with Karajan's Mahler is that he didn't delineate many polyphonic lines clearly enough. Take a listen to his M5th and M9th and you'll see what I mean. For Karajan, well blended and homogenized sound was everything that mattered to him. Unfortunately, Mahler's music requires a conductor who can see all the trees in the forest as well as the forest itself.

Are current conductors looking more at the individual trees than the forest and trees together?  Trends come and go in approach to a given composer's music.

Wade

[chalkpie]

Spun the 1st movmt last night. I thought it was very good  - and agree with John - a smoother approach with some details "missing" from other recordings that I've heard. Yet still, I really appreciate the manner in which he presented some of the musical ideas. The orchestra ain't oerfect either - there were hints of intonation problems in the brass. I will finish the other three today.

Gun to my head - the Chailly RCGO M9 is my desert island choice at this time.

[vvrinc]

I have always liked the "studio recorded" M9 from Karajan, although the "live" one is also among my favorite performances of the work. This preference has, perhaps, more to do with the "studio" version having better sound--analog--to these ears, anyway.

[chalkpie]

Heard the whole enchilada.

This is a very good recording - almost a no-brainer if you are an M9 diehard. Is it the "ultimate"? Who the f*** knows?! I get confused at this point I have so many damn Mahler recordings! 

Still, the adagio is REALLY emotional and beautifully played. It seems like to me they "got" it. And for a 1982(ish?) recording, it sounds phenomenal - one of the better 80's digital recordings Ive heard. I'm glad I now own this one.

Good job, Herbivore.

[mahler09]

Is it still in print?

[chalkpie]

Is it still in print?

Yes - and it is also pretty cheap used via Clamazon vendors if you partake.........

[James Meckley]

Is it still in print?

Yes - and it is also pretty cheap used via Clamazon vendors if you partake.........

If you do go after a used copy of the 1982 recording, be absolutely certain you're getting the "Karajan Gold" reissue, and not the original non-gold set. The difference in audio quality is astonishing—probably the biggest improvement I've ever heard in a remastering job.

James

[vvrinc]

If you do go after a used copy of the 1982 recording, be absolutely certain you're getting the "Karajan Gold" reissue, and not the original non-gold set. The difference in audio quality is astonishing—probably the biggest improvement I've ever heard in a remastering job.

James

Absolutely agree. Amen! (It's a shame more buyers aren't aware of this. Let's hope they read it here.)

[John Kim]

Is it still in print?

Yes - and it is also pretty cheap used via Clamazon vendors if you partake.........

If you do go after a used copy of the 1982 recording, be absolutely certain you're getting the "Karajan Gold" reissue, and not the original non-gold set. The difference in audio quality is astonishing—probably the biggest improvement I've ever heard in a remastering job.

James

That's not necessarily a blessing because the improved sound reveals and magnifies the glitches in the faulty playing. Also, mushc of the harshness that existed in the earlier edition and somehow compensated for the lack of edginess in Karajan's reading disappears in the Gold edition. For this reason, I personally prefer the original release over the Gold ed.

But that's just me.

John,

[akiralx]

This is the recording whose cover Karajan's biographer Richard Osborne felt was lampooned by John Eliot Gardiner's Chabrier CD.

Not sure I quite agree:

[chalkpie]

well they both have eyes, a nose, ears, and are looking left.......so I would agree that it is a total rip-off. The Karajan estate should sue.

[brunumb]

There is an uncanny resemblance between these two conductors and CD covers, with both performing M9 live with the same orchestra