B.G. listens: Macal/CPO M7, and Rattle/BPO M9 (from a download)

[barry guerrero]

Hi everyone,

A very generous soul has sent me burnt copies of the Macal/Czech Phil. M7 (Exton), as well as the Rattle/BPO M9, taken from an internet download.

Although I haven't listened to the whole thing, I'm particularly taken with the Macal/CPO M7. The conducting of it is well thought out, and the Czech Phil. just sound so utterly "natural" in this music - undoubtedly assisted by the excellent acoustics of those old concert halls in Prague. It's interesting to me that the (French)horns no longer play in the old Czech/East European style (small sound; lots of vibrato), but sound quite Germanic instead. I guess that's an improvement - they certainly play well. Their woodwinds remain excellent, and the dense string parts are highly clarified; and again, that's partly due to the excellent acoustics. I actually thought that there was a sufficient amount of cowbells/deep bells at the symphony's ending. I agree with John that the Kobayashi/CPO M7 is still really good (he has my old copy), but I prefer Macal's more light-hearted finale. I now think that this was the best overall Mahler release in 2007.

I'm not sure that I would say that about the Rattle/BPO M9. I like Rattle's pacing of the 9th - much more so than on his earlier Vienna performance (EMI). I'm also happy that Rattle has now dropped that stupid sounding slow-down at the end of the Rondo-Burlesque movement. But the recording is a tad problematic for me. Specifically, the percussion sound like they're out in left field, with the exception of the timapni (which sound rather close up). I might be wrong, but I thought I detected a couple of missed entrences from the percussion in the first movement. I'd have to go check my score, but I think that the very first cymbal crash is missing (did anybody else notice that?). I'll check it against the score to be sure. But as usual, the Berlin strings put on quite a show in the fourth movement. And the climaxes to the two outer movements are clearly better here than they were on Rattle's earlier one. But I'm just not sure how this one ranks in the pantheon of great Berlin M9's. I prefer the slightly rougher, grittier; less string driven textures from Barenboim's Staastskapelle Berlin. I also think that the percussion parts are better balanced (better heard) on the famous Karajan recording (with equal success at the major climaxes). I also like Abbado's faster concept of the first movement on his BPO recording of the 9th. Still, I very much look forward to seeing the PBS broadcast tomorrow night. It's also quite clear that Rattle's approach to the 9th has deepened over the last decade.

Barry

[John Kim]

Barry,

Thanks for your thoughts.

Regarding the Macal M7th, aren't you bothered by the late French horn entry in I.? Otherwise, it is an outstanding M7th.

About the Rattle M9th, as far as I can hear there is NO missing cymbal crash in I. The first and second crashes are at 6:12 and 6:32 respectively and there are all there.  You may be referring to the cymbal at 6:40 but that's supposed to be a roll, not a crash. If you recall, in the Abbado/BPO version there IS a cymbal crash at this last spot but we both agreed that was a mistake by the percussionist; even DG officially admitted it was a mistake. Strangely, the same thing happened in Abbado's live DVD.

I think this new M9th is terrific but like you said the sonics as heard on this iTune download is somewhat less than ideal. Let's hope the upcoming CD release will have improved sound.

John,

[John Kim]

Speaking of the live digital Karajan/BPO/DG M9th, the two cymbal rolls during the first and second climaxes are barely audible (altough they were loud in their earlier analogue recording). Also, Karajan mitigated the doom leaden timpani strokes during the development section way too much, i.e., they are stricken too softly. These are, IMO, signs that Karajan had not completely digested the Mahler idioms at the time of the recording.

John,

[Leo K]

Yes, if the Rattle could only be released as an SACD, or DVD-A, this could nearly be a first choice recent M9.  iTunes and classical music is just not a good mix...the music suffers in this format.  Actual product is always preferred in my opinion.  Lets hope the commercial CD at least has better sound quality.

The Macal M7 gets better with every listen...for me, the late horn is not an issue, but I hope folks will check out this excellant M7...the Kobayashi M7 is another awesome performance, and it is a totally different view, so it provides good contrast with the Macal...these are my top tier choices.  I also really enjoy the Kondrashin M7 on Tahra...exquisite playing from the RCO.  

The new release of the Tennstedt M7 on BBC Legends is a good complement to the Kondrashin here, both captured on tape from the later 1970's or early 1980's, I can't remember exactly.  Tennstedt's is very "outside" the lines, in almost every bar he is loose and messy, and sometimes alittle too slow, but all the same I enjoyed this performance for it's utter vulgar humour and sometimes sad tone...Mahler in a "Bizarro" world.  The Kondrashin M7 on Tahra is completely the opposite...refined, heroic, glorious, romantic and more!

--Todd

[barry guerrero]

As I said, I hadn't really listened to ALL of the Macal M7. During the first movement, I had to walk in and out of the room several times. Can you tell me approximately where the late horn entrence is?

As I also mentioned, I'll check the score of M9 in regards to its cymbal part. John, I'm sure you're right on all of the details! Regardless, I look forward to studying both of these recordings further.

Barry

 

[John Kim]

As I said, I hadn't really listened to ALL of the Macal M7. During the first movement, I had to walk in and out of the room several times. Can you tell me approximately where the late horn entrence is?

Barry

The VERY FIRST horn note in I.

John,

[barry guerrero]

OK, I finally listened to the alleged late entrance, and compared it against the score. Sure enough, the tenor horn (always played on a euphonium or "tenor tuba") has a sixteenth note there. But instead of sounding like a miscount, or like the player's lips just stalled, I think they may have deliberately changed the note value to a thirty-second note; thus making that first "pickup" note that much closer to the next downbeat. There would be some logic in doing that, as the tenor horn has thirty-second notes in the very next bar; right after the initial statement. I know that the printed score is considered to contain a good number of minor errors. Claudio Abbado put a lot of correntions in Fred Beckman's personal score of the 7th symphony, for example. Maybe this was one of those.

Barry

[John Kim]

To my ears it doesn't sound like an intentional modification. Even if they did it on purpose, it doesn't sound natural.

John,

[barry guerrero]

It doesn't seem likely to me that the tenor horn player - the person with THE first important entrance in the entire symphony - would just be napping on the job while recording a symphony that they've performed numerous times. And, if it wasn't a deliberate shortening of the note value, I'm sure they would have tried to fix such a mistake. I agree that it doesn't sound particularly "natural", because cutting the note value in half makes it extremely short - more like a grace note just before the downbeat. I think requesting that the player place accents on both the pickup note, and the downbeat note, would have made it sound less like a mistake. But they kept the dynamic level the same throughout. It does sound odd, but I can see the precedent for doing it that way.

I think that if we had been used to hearing that way for years, it wouldn't come across as a mistake at all. That's just an opinion.