DH picks best Mahler cycles.

[John Kim]

David Hurwitz just did a survey of Mahler cycles on YouTube. The best ones are, Chailly, Bertini, Gielen, and two Bernsteins.

Honorable mentions = Ozawa, Haitink, Kubelik, Neumann, MTT.

[barryguerrero]

Those are pretty sensible picks. However, I almost really enjoy more the orchestra driven ones, where they use different conductors on different symphonies. That seems to work better for me.

I have to tell you, I was pretty depressed when D.H. dismissed the Nott/Bamberg cycle and the Stenz/Gurzenich one (he even tossed the Stenz one!), then went on to praise the MTT/SFS one. In NO WAY would I promote the Tilson-Thomas box over the other two, irrespective of the difference in the orchestras involved.

[erikwilson7]

Just like his opinion on Adam Fischer’s recordings, I do NOT understand what he dislikes about Stenz’s or Nott’s (on a general level of course, none of them are perfect).

It leads me to believe that he doesn’t listen to all these recordings. He must have heard Fischer’s 7, 2, and 9 and generalized that the whole cycle is poo. I guarantee he’d change his mind if he heard the 3 and 4.

As for Stenz, most of those reviews on his website were written by Victor Carr, not Hurwitz. I wonder what he thinks about each recording. If he’s even heard them…

[barryguerrero]

Yes, Erik, and I've been holding back this particular punch. I really believe that D.H. is falling into the very traps that he said drove him crazy about other, existing reviewers in the first place (especially British). He's always quick to point out when others believe their own P.R. too much (and he's right!). But he sometimes fall into that trap himself. He's quick to generalize based upon WHO the name on the cover is. David didn't start out that way. I think he's just found listening to a lot of Mahler gets in the way of his listening to more off-the-beaten-path stuff. He loves discovering new things - rightfully so! And if that's true, that's OK. He just needs to admit that he can't cover everything, and that that's not where his interests lie at the moment. But he wants to be the dictating Moses of all things that don't fall upon his other reviewers. It's the dismissive-ness that bothers me.

[John Kim]

As for me, I am not really hot about Gielen's cycle. I'd instead go for the Neumann. My solid choices are the two Bernsteins, Ozawa, Haitink, and Neumann. Edo de Waart's cycle isn't far behind either.

Stenz is very good too especially for the 4-8. I have heard only the 3rd, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 9th from the Nott set. They are very good to excellent. I don't get why DH dismissed the cycle either (I know he pretty much trashed the 9th).

John

[erikwilson7]

Just for fun, here are the highlights for me on Nott and Stenz:
Nott - 2, 4 (incredible), 6, 7, 9
Stenz - 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, and Des Knaben Wunderhorn (among the best, IMO)

And just for good measure, here are my highlights for A. Fischer: 1, 3, 4, 7, Das Lied (I also liked what I heard of 6 so far)

To go along with the topic of picking favorite complete cycles I would choose Chailly, Kubelík, Gielen, Stenz, Boulez. Call me the lover of ‘detached’ Mahler conducting. Honorable mentions: de Waart and Bertini.

[ChrisH]

My favorite cycles:

Zinmann - Tonhalle Zurich
Gielen - Baden-Baden
Kondrashin - Moscow
Inbal - Frankfurt/Czech Phil/Tokyo Met
Chailly RCO/Leipzig I'd replace the RCO accounts with Leipzig and it would be perfect.
Mahler Broadcast box-set

Francois Xavier-Roths cycle, when complete is something I'm personally looking forward too. It also seems I need to pull out my Nott/Bamberg stuff and take a more serious listen. It's been a while.

[erikwilson7]

Chris, I resonate with you on Chailly's cycles. He's one of the few conductors who actually changed his approach with a second cycle, and all for the better. Here's hoping we get more audio releases from Chailly in the future. He's a Mahlerian for the ages, up there with the very best.

[John Kim]

Yep, I too prefer Chailly's second cycle over his RCO cycle.

John

[John Kim]

I have a feeling that DH reads too much into what others are saying. If I were him I wouldn't mind what others say about music (and myself) and just keep on working my way.

John

PS I have a feeling that he reads my postings on Mahler 

[erikwilson7]

He may read these. He used to post on this site for a while. If he is taking the time to go on this site as a guest, then I’d want him to know that regardless of what criticism I throw his way I respect his opinion as a professional. This is music, and everything is subjective. Diverse opinions are important, too.
And even though I may disagree with him on Mahler, I still have his books and watch his videos. He’s an informed, funny guy.
I mean no harm. This is all just constructive criticism and it’s actually spawned a valuable discussion among this group.