New arrangement for mini ensemble M9 world premiere

[stillivor]

It'll be near the end of this month in Berlin.

More details plus 3 minute excerpt here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5M_99-an7xg



     Ivor

[Michael]

Wow...that has potential!  I hope they release a recording of that at some point.

[Leo K]

There is no way I would be interested in a scaled-down M9...what is the point?

 

[stillivor]

Perhaps one point is that the work becomes performable off the major concert circuit and where resources are limited, especially in these days of austerity. What did Mahler say about not hesitating to make changes given available locations and numbers on hand?

Perhaps, tho' this is a stretch, it might make some sorts of analysis easier where every part may be more exposed?



     Ivor

[waderice]

Perhaps one point is that the work becomes performable off the major concert circuit and where resources are limited, especially in these days of austerity. What did Mahler say about not hesitating to make changes given available locations and numbers on hand?

Perhaps, tho' this is a stretch, it might make some sorts of analysis easier where every part may be more exposed?

     Ivor

As far as I've been able to determine from what Mahler meant when he sanctioned changes to the orchestration in his scores, I personally believe that Mahler didn't mean wholesale major changes.  I believe he meant that changes were needed only when the acoustics of a given hall demanded it.  I've forgotten which changes were made in the instrumentation due to the problematic hall in LA during the recent Dudamel performance of M8, but that might be a recent example to cite (aside from the organ and other sound system adjustments made to help the performance's impact).

Wade

[James Meckley]

What did Mahler say about not hesitating to make changes given available locations and numbers on hand?

I know of two such quotes attributed to Mahler, but I can find only one of them at the moment. It comes from Peter Heyworth's Conversations with Klemperer, 1973, p. 34:

"If after my death something doesn't sound right then change it. You have not only the right but the duty to do so."

EDIT: I located the other quote; it's mentioned in the Blaukopfs' Mahler: His Life, Work and World, 1976/1991, p. 252. Speaking to the orchestra during a rehearsal of his Second Symphony, Mahler said:

"Clarity is my chief concern. All power to the conductor who alters my scores where the acoustics of the hall or the quality of the orchestra demand it, to carry out my intentions."

I also came across this howler from the otherwise respectable Deems Taylor: "Someday, some real friends of Mahler's will take a pruning knife and reduce his works to the length that they would have been if the composer had not stretched them out of shape; and then the great Mahler war will be over... The Ninth Symphony would last about twenty minutes."

James

[barry guerrero]

"I've forgotten which changes were made in the instrumentation due to the problematic hall in LA during the recent Dudamel performance of M8, but that might be a recent example to cite"

Wade,

As best as I could tell, they did not double any of the winds or percussion for the Dudamel M8 in L.A. In fact, I was rather surprised that they used only one set of timpani. When they combined the two orchestras, it was really only just the strings that got expanded (and hugely so). They were way out in front of the mikes for the Meyer sound system (as were the vocal soloists), so I guess they were the ones who needed the boost in numbers. The did use an 'assistant principal' for both the trumpets and horns, so that brought the horns up to 9 and the trumpets up to 5.

Barry

[waderice]

So, it seems that this new arrangement of M9 is apparently a re-orchestration.  The questions are, to what degree, and would Mahler himself sanction it?

Wade

[Michael]

The thing that interests me about this arrangement is the possibility of it being performable by a chamber ensemble.

[James Meckley]

Since this is an arrangement for 17 players, I imagine there was necessarily some reassignment of voices, but—judging from the excerpts provided—that has been done effectively and the basic Mahler sound remains. As the blurb states, Klaus Simon's arrangement has been made in the very same spirit as the arrangements of M4 and Das Lied von der Erde created by Schoenberg and his followers for the Verein für musikalische Privataufführungen (1918–21) in Vienna.

I, for one, treasure the Schoenberg arrangements, own multiple recordings of each, and look forward to hearing this M9 by the mini-Mahler Project, at least in recorded form. Mahler may have smiled wryly, but as long as the arrangement is as effective as this one seems to be and is presented with passion and enthusiasm, I can't believe he would have disapproved—either of Schoenberg's work, or of Klaus Simon's.

James

[barry guerrero]

I also came across this howler from the otherwise respectable Deems Taylor: "Someday, some real friends of Mahler's will take a pruning knife and reduce his works to the length that they would have been if the composer had not stretched them out of shape; and then the great Mahler war will be over... The Ninth Symphony would last about twenty minutes."

Name one work by Deems Tayler (?). I know I can't. "Howler" indeed.

By and large, this reduction of M9 seems to have been very carefully done. Obviously, the excerpts for the 2nd and 3rd movements will sound less 'foreign' than what we hear in the finale - which is where one would miss the bigger, fatter string sound. In my opinion, I think that string sections are sometimes too 'big' in Mahler, which forces the brass to not make clear distinctions between mezzo forte, forte and fortissimo (gradations of loudness, in other words). One reason that I'm not always so crazy about the Berlin Phil. in Mahler, is that their powerful strings actually drown out wind detail that should register a bit more sharply. Obviously, the 9th symphony would be a major exception to that, particularly in the two outer movements (Mahler divides his strings into many different 'strands' in parts of the first movement, for example). But by and large, I prefer the Concertgebouw, Czech Phil. and N.Y. Phil. approaches to Mahler, with their greater emphasis on woodwinds and percussion, and a tad less on strings and brass (that said, the N.Y. brass are pretty muscular these days - partly out of necessity to 'over-take' the acoustics in Avery Fischer).

I don't know, I always have mixed feelings about these efforts to make Mahler more intimate. I admire what they do on the one hand. But the other hand, I don't particularly want to hear Mahler played this way more than once. I generally believe that Mahler knew what he was doing, regardless of what Deems Taylor may say. I also think that the 'reduction' for DLvdE could be a whole better than it is without having to add very many more players.

Still, I hope good fortune to the people involved in this project.

[John Kim]

I'd wait until I get to hear the first movt. That will be the real test because of all 4 movts it has the most complicated polyphony, the thickest harmony, loudest climaxes, and all that.

John,

[barry guerrero]

Exactly. If you take just the main climax, what would that be without a fortissimo swipe on the big tam-tam?  Then if did include a loud tam-tam stroke, what would that be without fortissimo trombones and tuba to 'answer' it? And if you did have the fortissimo low brass, how would you make the transition back to a more intimate, chamber-like sound without it also sounding awkward and self-conscious? What of the chimes that follow shortly afterwords?

I 'get it' that Mahler's music is so great that there are those who want to make it accessible to smaller venues and smaller, 'chamber-ish' groups. But Mahler's orchestrations are fully integral to what he was expressing with the notes themselves. When you take away the orchestrations, you take away much of what the music is all about. I, for one, don't 'get it' as to why somebody would want to further 'chamber-ize' "Das Lied von der Erde" - the chamber music like elements are already built into what Mahler had composed. If you take away what muscle there already is (which ain't a lot) - along with much of the colorings - what are you left with? I suppose if you want to make it an easier day for the vocalists, then I guess it makes some sense. But the whole point of the first song in "DLvdE", for example,  is that the tenor IS supposed to struggle against the orchestra (I'm convinced that Mahler hated tenors anyway). Personally, I couldn't care less if the horns drowned out the tenor altogether. The important words are "dunkel is das Leben, ist der Tod" (dark is life, dark is death).

I'm laboring my point, but I you think you can see what I'm driving at.

[merlin]

But Mahler's orchestrations are fully integral to what he was expressing with the notes themselves.

Thanks for this, Barry.  It helps me to understand why I do not respond well to the various completions of M10, such as Litton/DSO, which I listened to last night. 

It is all-too-obvious, and even painful, that the orchestrations are guesses and approximations on the part of the completers, however educated they might be, and definitely not those Mahler might have written.  I even get a strong feeling that he would have changed some of the orchestrations for the Adagio as well.

[stillivor]

Mahler, like very many other esteemed musicians, did make piano arrangements, for example, his of Bruckner.



     Ivor