F. Charles Adler's M6

[Leo K]

I am amazed to find how wonderful the first ever recording of the M6 sounds.  This performance is now near the top, if not at the top of my favorite all time recordings of this work. Adler uses the Mahler's 2nd edition of the score (andante/scherzo) by the way, and it is very convincing performance of andante/scherzo.  In other words, I don't feel the need to switch the movement order here.  It's a shame I don't have the original vinyl and a turntable, as I heard the transfer in this release isn't the best.

What exactly do I like about it?  The orchestra was rougher and stronger than what I expected, and there is a great 'old world' string sound that really sounds radiant.   

Here is some info from Jeffery Lipscomb (on Amazon):

F. Charles Adler (1889-1959) studied with Mahler and was a chorus master in the composer's 1910 world premiere of the 8th Symphony at Munich. Adler is one of five conductors closely acquainted with Mahler who left recordings of the composer's works. The others were Oscar Fried, Willem Mengelberg, Otto Klemperer and Bruno Walter (it is thought that another distinguished Mahler conductor, Hermann Scherchen, may have played in an orchestra under the composer's direction). Other great Mahler champions, all of whom made recordings that pre-date those of Leonard Bernstein, included Jascha Horenstein, Hans Rosbaud, Dmitri Mitropoulos, Willem von Otterloo (a wonderful 4th on Epic LP), Ernest Borsamsky (only the 1st on Dante LYS), and Rafael Kubelik (Barbirolli was a latecomer to the Mahler party).

Adler was born in London to an English-German banking family. He studied briefly with Mottl (who also mentored Abendroth and Furtwangler). He held various appointments at Ljubljana and Dusseldorf and in 1924-31 was head of broadcasting for the German state radio in Berlin. Adler also operated a publishing house, Edition Adler, which issued music of then little known composers like Charles Ives. Adler emigrated to the United States in 1933 and married Hannah Moriarta in 1936. His wife came from a wealthy family in Saratoga Springs, New York, where she and Adler settled.

Adler was something of a hero to early LP record collectors for his first-ever recordings of such works as the Mahler 3rd & 6th Symphonies, the Bruckner Mass #1, the Liszt Dante Symphony, and a slew of others. The LP notes for that Mahler 3rd were written by Mahler's widow Alma, who concluded by saying "score readers will note that in several places there are small deviations between the published score and the music heard. These differences represent corrections which Mahler himself made after the publication of the score." These recordings were all issued on Adler's own SPA LP label, which ostensibly stood for "Society of Participating Artists" (SPA was really a play on words referring to Saratoga Springs, a town well-known as a resort spa). The Mahler 3 & 6 have been issued in England on the Conifer CD label (lousy transfers). There is also a slightly faster, "live" Adler-conducted 3rd on Tahra 340-341.

[barry guerrero]

Hmmmmm, I think you have that backwards, Leo. All performances of the Mahler 6th are of the revised version. I haven't heard F. Charles Adler's M6 in 2.5 decades, but it's my understanding that it's possibly the ONLY recording of M6 that uses the first version throughout. This issue is completely separate from that of movement order. The first version has even more gratuitous brass and percussion in the finale. If you own a Dover Edition score of M6, you'll actually be able to read the differences - assuming that one knows the revised score quite well. I'm very curious to re-hear this now. When I first heard it, I wasn't even aware that there had been an earlier, un-revised version.

I know his M3 very well. It's an expansive and pretty sounding performance; but one that's also wanting a bit in sheer excitement, I feel.

[Leo K]

Hmmmmm, I think you have that backwards, Leo. All performances of the Mahler 6th are of the revised version. I haven't heard F. Charles Adler's M6 in 2.5 decades, but it's my understanding that it's possibly the ONLY recording of M6 that uses the first version throughout. This issue is completely separate from that of movement order. The first version has even more gratuitous brass and percussion in the finale. If you own a Dover Edition score of M6, you'll actually be able to read the differences - assuming that one knows the revised score quite well. I'm very curious to re-hear this now. When I first heard it, I wasn't even aware that there had been an earlier, un-revised version.

I know his M3 very well. It's an expansive and  pretty performance, but one that's also wanting a bit in sheer excitement, I feel.

I did not know that, thanks for the info!  I was just thinking of movement order, I didn't know Mahler revised the instrumentation after switching the movements.  So thats why the Finale sounds different!

[barry guerrero]

Well, according to the latest findings of those who believe that they know every conversation and thought that Mahler ever had, he never switched the movement order. The conductor's score is published in S/A order, but the player's parts are in A/S order. Obviously, everyone involved has to get on the same page - literally.

[Leo K]

Well, according to the latest findings of those who believe that they know every conservation and thought that Mahler ever had, he never switched the movement order. The conductor's score is published in S/A order, but the player's parts are in A/S order. Obviously, everyone involved has to get on the same page - literally.

I went back to Jerry Bruck's article to review this matter...you problably know it, called "Undoing A Tragic Mistake".  It's a helpful article regarding the publishing history of the 6th.  Bruck says that there were two versions of the score still in circulation (after the Vienna premiere in 1907), Mahler's 1st (original) and 2nd (revised) editions, and both editions were dated 1906 "with no indication of which one had superceded the other.  Both scores bore the same plate number, 4162, and both scores of Zemlinksy's piano reduction had plate number 4649". 

In 1910, Mahler signed on with Universal Edition to publish his new work and older works (including the 6th).  In "some cases the [old scores] were given a new cover and a new UE catalog number, but in others, UE simply put its own imprint on the scores as they changed hands.  In so doing UE unknowingly distributed some of Kahnt's [the previous publisher of the 6th] obsolete scherzo-andante stock, warehoused after being replaced by the revised versions of the scores.  The implications of this are particularly interesting in the light of later events, since scores bearing the UE stamp might appear to be a later publication.  This could seem to support the notion that Mahler had changed his mind yet again about the order of the sixth's movements."

Very interesting to consider!

 

[barry guerrero]

Regardless, I think it's good that there are now conductors who are standing up to the Mahler Police Squad, and are reverting back to S/A on purely musical grounds. That said, perhaps this whole controversy will force those same conductors to think more carefully about tempo relationships between the first movement and scherzo - not permitting themselves or the orchestra to settle into just any old tempo.

[Leo K]

Regardless, I think it's good that there are now conductors who are standing up to the Mahler Police Squad, and are reverting back to S/A on purely musical grounds. That said, perhaps this whole controversy will force those same conductors to think more carefully about tempo relationships between the first movement and scherzo - not permitting themselves or the orchestra to settle into just any old tempo.

Absolutely agree. 

I love that phrase "Mahler Police Squad" 

[michaelw]

Mahler Police Squad is a really good expression! This kind of squads can be found in all genres.
I think that the S/A – A/S question is quite symptomatic when people discuss the “real” intention of a composer. In my opinion the composers often have seen and see this much more pragmatic. For that a nice story I like very much (probably you know it).

The composer and musical scientist Wellesz, who attended the rehearsals for the last Mahler concert (2nd Symphony) in Vienna in 1907, reports this episode according to Fischer’s bio: In the final movement the soprano should sound brightly at “O Tod, du Allbezwinger”. The soloist was Selma Kurz and she had a nice and expressive voice, but not a very loud one. At this point the trombones have to play very pianissimo. Despite of some repetitions the voice remained to weak in order to express what the composer wanted to say. Finally Mahler brought himself to say: “Well, let’s leave the trombones out” and then he added in a nearly festive way: “God bless the conductor, who will perform my scores according to the acoustics of the concert hall."

Fischer adds: Imagine a conductor who would act so today, his condemnation would be sure.


I know, that’s acoustics, not inner dramaturgy as for the S/A question, but it shows, that even Mahler, who worked out and prescribed nearly anything in the score, wanted to make his work “work” and sound at the very first.  And if sounds better without trombones - leave them out for this performance.

For me the S/A order has more advantages and more inner symmetry than A/S, but I am sure, that if Mahler had lived another 30, 40 years (as many others, imagine Mahler to live until 1950!), both options had been tried out.

Michael

[Ivor]

   I have a special Affection for Adler's M6 buying it on the super-bargain Delta label in the 60s. As,no doubt,for others,it was my first experience of the 6th.

   So,in some ways,I measure other performances by it. There are things about it I like,especially the dogged,measured opening,and a winning andante. Maybe because this first hearing placed the andante second, I prefer it that way.

   I think the order question is really for another thread. Just to say, when Mahler conducted 6,he played A/S.


      Ivor