listened to Zinman M3 from start to finish

[barry guerrero]

Man, I sure hate to try talk any of you into buying yet another Mahler 3rd. But I've got to tell you, this new Zinman one floats right to the top of my list. It seems to incorporate so much of what I like from many of the previous recordings that I've admired over the years. I don't know how else to put it. I feel that it's very musical; very well thought out, yet "red hot" where it needs to be. For example, the beginning of the development section in the first movement - starting with the big soli for the low strings - is taken at a fairly fast tempo. When you get to where the low brass - trombones and tuba - do their silly "cuckoo" figures (downbeats and afterbeats), they really belt those out there. Remember how this passage sounded on the Lopez-Cobos M3?  .    .    .    it's even better here. The central development passage of the scherzo is pretty "red hot" as well. Where the horns take the lead, they belt their part out too. Yet, the reprise of the posthorn solo (offstage trumpet) is done fairly slow - as if the forest animals were being lulled back to sleep. As Mahler said, it makes me laugh just think of all the forest animals bopping about. What a piece.

Barry

[John Kim]

Barry,

Sounds like ti may be worth looking into this M3rd. But I was not very impressed with Zinman's M2nd; it was too tame for my taste and had some misjudged dynamics. Do you like Zinman's M3 more than Kobayashi's?

John,

[barry guerrero]

Zinman's M3 has some of the intensity of Kobayashi in the bigger moments. I feel that the Zinman is slightly better recorded; and that Birgirt Remmert is clearly the better mezzo. I also very much like the trombonist soloist in Zurich, and feel that the offstage trumpet parts are better gauged on the Zinman.  But if you already own the Kobayashi, I'm not sure that you need to have the Zinman. But as I said, it seems to incorparate a lot of things that I've admired in a number of early recordings.

The recording philosophy seems to be very different on Zinman's M3, than it was on his M2. With M2, the mikes were backed off, so that the  perspective was from farther back in the hall. I think that that paid off at the very of the symphony. But in contrast to that, Zinman's M3 is recorded so that every tiny detail of the work is clearly audible, including that very soft percussion soli located just before the first trombone solo. Things that are very difficult to hear in most M3s - such as the beginning of the vocal movement, for example - are perfectly clear here.

I really feel that Zinman's M2 is worth a relisten. It's very different from the Boulez/VPO M2, for example. The priorities are entirely different. Listen to the last several minutes of the first movement. Boulez was very fast through this final passage. Zinman is slower, and he doesn't speed up as you approach the climax - the final loud tam-tam smash in the movement. I actually feel that this is sort of an important point. Otherwise, why would Mahler have asked for five minutes of silence after the first movement?

Also, listen to how the priorities are completely different at the end of the symphony. Boulez has a very upfront chorus, and perfectly clear tam-tam smashes. But Zinman has far better deep bells, and is more thoughtful in his decisions on how to use them. His M2 also has a far heftier organ (still can't hear any on the Boulez).

[Leo K]

Well Barry, you've talked me into trying out this Zinman   

--Leo

[barry guerrero]

I don't think you'll be sorry. But if that turns out to be the case, I'll buy it off of you.

[barry guerrero]

I Read the review - as much as I could stomach of it -  and don't agree with it in the slightest. Note that he holds Abbado's first M3 - the one with the VPO - in very high esteem. There are some terrific moments in that performance, no doubt, but there are also a number of less than stellar ones too. To give but one example: the brief percussion soli - located just before the start of the trombone solo - is a messy disaster on the Abbado (if you listen to it loud on headphones, you'll even hear somebody drop the tambourine). On the Zinman, it's perfectly audible. Beyond all that, the sound on the Abbado/VPO M3 has an ubsurdly exaggerated dynamic range, due to it being an early digital recording.

It was recorded rather close up. Yet, the soft parts fall almost completely below the radar screen. That was a characteristic of bad digital recordings in the ealry 80's. Try listening to the double basses at the beginning of the vocal movement without running up to your stereo to turn up the volume. It also was lacking in richness in the lower mid-range. The upper midrange sounded nearly as shrill and harsh as the top notes. You know, the funny thing is, this Zinman M3 incorporates some of the things that I really like about that first Abbado recording; particularly the intensity in the horns. Previoiusly, I've often times complained about the kettle drums being too loud in the last thirty seconds of the entire symphony (two sets, going back and forth on the tonic and dominant notes) - sounding as though someone were trying to build a garage. But on the Abbado/VPO one, they're soft and "spongey" sounding; to the point of almost being inaudible. I think that Zinman gets the timpani balance just right, as well as observing Mahler's description of what he wants from the brass there ("with a noble, saturated tone"). I also find Abbado's VPO "bim-bam" movement lacking a bit in joyeousness. Make no mistake, he really gets his muted brass to snear in the central passage. But so does Zinman. On the whole, I'll take the Zinman anyday.

Barry

[Martin Bernhard]

Does anyone know when it is going to be released in Europe? Not the slightest trace of it so far....

Yours,

Martin

brisiacvs