I agree with Mark on this. I was terribly disappointed.
(We exchanged opinions about it on the Mahler-List as well, in
this thread. Others were a lot more enthusiastic about it)
"Terrible performace from what I listened (Part 1 and Part 2 from Mater gloriosa to end through the webcast -- which has its own problems with the off-stage orchestra, for example, barely audible).
Soloists awful, whiny tenor, soprano I can't hold a top C for five seconds. Imple superna for example feels like a drag, as if the soloists want to try to see when it will all fall apart.
The blemishes of the orchestra are incredible. Trumpets fail on the high notes at every opportunity. Feels underrehearsed with everybody playing the notes but nobody's together. For example, the orchestral interlude just before the ppp choir entrance loses all its magic when the whole horn and woodwind section forgets to count. Tempo changes feel like Belohlavek is riding a wild horse much less having control. This is one of Britain's leading orchestras?
The only grandeur I feel comes from the music and not from the performers."
And another response of mine:
"I was curious enough, so I checked the possible rehearsal time:
Belohlavek was with the BBCSO at the Festival in Bad Kissingen on June 23 & 25. Belohlavek's next conducting assignment was the M8 (info from
http://jiribelohlavek.com/); the BBCSO had one more concert on July 9th (the "BBC Proms Out+About"), so tutti rehearsals probably started after that, which means it was at most a week.
> Bělohlávek admitted in an interview accompanying the BBC television relay that he'd conducted the piece only once before, 30 years earlier, and it showed.
The same was true with Boulez when he conducted the M8 again in 2006 (and recorded it 2008 with the same forces, with one or two performances before that). The 2006 performance was not "perfect" but Boulez had clear ideas about the piece and as far as I can remember, the recording had very similar concepts (certain slow tempi, extra loud harmonium for example).
> [...] orchestral mistakes were no worse than you'd expect from an orchestra that has to shoulder 11 concerts during the Proms season with no repeats.
Then perhaps it shouldn't be asked from the players to try the impossible (c.f. a Mahler cycle of the Staatskappelle in 10 days), otherwise what's the point? Besides, it was the first performance, and as far as I read about the Eighth, it's not as technically demanding as some of the others (while I grant, that it's much less performed, so the players would be less familiar with it).
For what it's worth, I was very interested in the performance. I would have even listened to it live at home, but was in the local band's last subscription concerto (Norrington's Bruckner 9th). Was it my high expectations? Possibly (compared to my low expectations of Norrington's Bruckner 9th, which surprised me as well in the end).
As you can see from my first mail (which was written just after I heard the last note), I was talking only about the technical side. Point being, that I didn't even come around to listen to Belohlavek's view of the work, because every time I tried to notice the performance the numerous errors just kicked me in my head thinking: "What was that again?".
I know the soprano I part is exceedingly difficult, as is the tenor part, but what's the point in performing this work when, as I already wrote, the soprano can't sustain high notes for five seconds just before "Alles Vergängliche", for example. Someone might ask now: "Why is such a minute detail important?". The soprano is first singing with the soprano's from the choirs ("zieht uns hinan"), then rises above them to a top C ("hervortretend" writes Mahler) and then a B. Then soprano II rises to this very same note (again with the text "zieht uns hinan") and takes over the melody from her. It's a magical moment when performed as written.
The other big one I can remember is after the orchestral climax (with the choirs singing "Bleibe gnädig") when the music is getting calmer for the interlude (before the Chorus mysticus) but the wind and brass players got confused about their entrances (then the violins entered somewhere in-between as well). My guess is that the trouble came from the counting, because the meter changes to cut time at rehearsal number 197 ("half notes played as the preceding whole notes" notes the score). So instead of the music calming down, we have the opposite effect.
I could go back now and re-listen the performance and give even more example of how such important moments came out wrong. But I feel this performance had more attention from me than it deserves.
Zoltan
(who usually doesn't have such a strong opinion after just one listen)"
Topic: Jiři Bělohlávek's Mahler fails to impress Mark Berry (Read 9764 times)