a revisit: Jansons/RCOA M6

[barry guerrero]

I don't mean to bud in on your guys' Haitink love-fest (bleccccch! - I'd sooner kill myself)   , but I've been revisiting a number of M6 recordings myself. I'm really taken by Janson's straight forward, no-nonesense approach, combined with the thorough musicality of the Concertgebouw Orchestra (perfect balance between all four sections of the orchestra), all captured with a reasonable amount of hall ambiance from the Concertgebouw itself. As always with this orchestra, the woodwinds and percussion are outstanding. The brass and strings are reasonably good too, especially the upper strings. While perhaps straight forward to a fault, Jansons doesn't put a foot wrong anyplace. Nothing strikes me as being under tempo anywhere, either. I think that Wunderhorn would like this one much more than the Chailly. Janson's 23:45 timing for the first movement is closer to the mean (Chailly is well over 25 minutes). And while Jansons and Chailly have similar timings for the scherzo (13 - something), I find Jansons' to be more sharply etched. In the andante movement (placed second here), Jansons starts slower than Chailly, but he makes a big accellerando going into the movement's climactic passage. This is in direct opposition to Eschenbach - who I do like - who actually gets slower over the movement's climactic passage.

Just as with Chailly, Jansons eschews any reinforcement on the second hammerstroke. Maybe that's just a Concertgebouw "thang" (?). Both conductors are good in this movement, but I think Jansons does a slightly better job overall. At the final allegro "charge", just after the second cowbell episode, you can really hear those fast runs in the upper strings. I find that very thrilling. All that said, there's just one spot where I feel that Chailly is clearly better; and it's an important spot: the very last several bars of the entire symphony. At the end, Jansons is rather fast with that final A-minor outburst, fading down to nothing. Chailly takes it incredibly slow, yet very rhythmically in the timpani.

I feel that this is a Mahler recording that's very easy to overlook. Afterall, Jansons recorded it before with the LSO, and the differences aren't all that great. However, I like the sound better on this one, as I've never been a fan of James Mallinson engineered recordings (he did the Haitink/CSO M3). They always strike me as sounding a bit "dry"; possessing a lot of width from side to side, but not a lot of front to back depth. However, it's just the thorough musicality of this endevour that really wins me over. I think it's a very good, straight forward, no-nonsense presentation of the symhony at its more earnest. And by the way, this one works perfectly fine in either A/S order (as recorded), or in S/A order.

[Leo K]

Well, this sounds like an excellent recording...after reading this I ran over to amazon and tried out the samples...right away I could hear a bassoon in the blend of woodwinds where I usually never hear it, and the effect was strangely very Mozartian.  This kind of orchestral color always makes my day, and it's great when a recording is clear enough to hear these great blends in the orchestration.  I'm going to get this!!

I've been going through alot of M6's too the last four days, and I'm noticing some changes in my usual top choices.  I'm hearing alot of good recordings I haven't explored yet, and they are replacing my old favorites. 


--Leo

[John Kim]

Still, I find Jansons's way with M6th in this RCA recording somewhat lackluster. Not much bite or stinging, and you know a Mahler without them is like a rifle without a bullet.

John,

[Psanquin]

Thanks Barry Guerrero for the detailed comment in this recording strangely overlooked. I agree very much with your description. There are a lot of interesting points in this recording -which BTW I do not find it much different from the LSO Live one- but at the end I feel like John Kim that it is a bit uninspiring.

[John Kim]

Still, I find Jansons's way with M6th in this RCA recording somewhat lackluster. Not much bite or stinging, and you know a Mahler without them is like a rifle without a bullet.

John,

Sorry I meant "...in this RCO - Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra - recording...".

I do admit though that Jansons's live concerts of M5 with PSO and M7 with RCO were topnotch.

John,

[Leo K]

I'm curious to finally hear this Jansons/RCO recording...if anything the sound (and detail) of the orchestra appears to be well captured, according to Barry's review. 

--Leo

[barry guerrero]

"Not much bite or stinging, and you know a Mahler without them is like a rifle without a bullet".

I don't really quite agree with that, John. First off, when everything is executed this musically, it doesn't need to have the rhetorical elements underlined. But more to the point, this recording sounds really good when turned waaaaay up loud. That's when the bite and sting presents itself just fine. In fact, I think that the percussion smash and bang things far better here than on some other, more brass heavy performances.

[John Kim]

Barry,

Your are right. When I played it loud on an amp. that is known to produce "hard" sound, it sounded terrific. The roaring lower brass in the Finale right after the first hammer blow is terrific. Overall, Jansons's reading reminds me of the old Haitink on Philips.

John,

[barry guerrero]

"Overall, Jansons's reading reminds me of the old Haitink on Philips".

Exactly, but with more bass.

[Leo K]

This Jansons M6 just made my night...what a great performance, with nice detail heard throughout the orchestra, and nothing is really over emphasized until the finale, which really works well dramatically.  I especially like the execution of the Alma theme in the first movement, not pushed too hard but intense in the concentration.  The Andante has a hushed intensity, but the music is let to speak for itself...no obvious interpetation here, nor in the scherzo, where the concentration makes it all interesting...the subtle choices made thoughout the whole performance in movement and phrasing are wonderful.  Bravo, and thanks for the heads up Barry.


--Leo

P.S.  Wunderhorn, Barry is right, this is your M6. 

[Ivor]

Barry,in your comments on the Jansons and Chailly in the andante ,you say they do opposite things at one point.

Are they,or can they(?) , both being going with the grain of what Mahler wanted?

I haven't heard either.

[barry guerrero]

Jansons is one minute slower in the andante than Chailly. Chailly starts out quicker; Jansons slower. But heading into the climactic passage of the movement - where the music turns loud - Jansons does more of an accellerando. So, without actually comparing, the two of them must be at fairly similar tempi throughout the climax.

Mahler does call for an accelleradano leading into the climactic passage. But, as usual with Mahler, there are no metronome markings, etc. Chailly is more correct in only that Mahler's own timing for the movement was consistantly less than 15 minutes. Jansons runs closer to 16. But there are many conductors who have extended this movement out past 17 and 18 minutes. As I've pointed out endlessly, this is not an adagio movement. The word "langsam" (slow) is never even mentioned in the score. Hope this clarifies things.

I prefer Chailly's swifter tempo overall (in the andante movement), but very much like Janson's big accellerando.

[Ivor]

My mistake. I should have said 'Jansons and Eschenbach' , vis-a-vis the climax of the ANDANTE.[ i agree it doesn't say adagio,btw.]

Comments from ivan Fischer on M6 can be found near the end of the Board,also btw,


   ivor

[Leo's little film loop is quite mesmerising sometimes. How d'you do that?]

[Leo K]

Ivor, I didn't create the little animated gif but I found it on a Beach Boys forum (it's Brian Wilson).  You can post an animated gif the same way you post images 


--Leo