Which was a more interesting Mahlerite?

[Wunderhorn]

We know Mahler had early fans like Walter, Klemperer and so on; As well as early obsessives in what was the postwar recording capital, such as Horenstein and Barbirolli. But as far as those to come along a split second later; In other words, those to lay out complete symphony cycles and launch him into what has become a less sketchy discography, we have primarily Kubelik, Bernstein, and Haitink. I automatically dismissed Haitink, for most would agree him more a professional conductor than a student of any chief musical particulars, though that can't be said for neither Kubelik nor Bernstein. I've heard some say that the DG Kubelik boxset would have to be torn from their stiff, cold, dead fingers and that he had the best sense for Mahlerian counterpoint. While Bernstein is probably the most celebrated Mahlerite of all time. But who trumps who, or where do you see their stature headed in the forseeable future?

[Jot N. Tittle]

While Bernstein is probably the most celebrated Mahlerite of all time. But who trumps who, or where do you see their stature headed in the forseeable future?

Kubelik can hardly compete with Bernstein in self-promotion. In time, someone else will probably rise in fame. Rattle and Chailly are still young enough to generate a larger following, and if he lives long enough, Abbado may also acquire additional patina. For celebrity, though, Lenny holds the ring.

    . & '

[bluesbreaker]

I think as interpreter Bernstein is still more interesting, if not better, than Kubelik.

[Wunderhorn]

I've been listening to Kubelik DG boxset, and I'm not as blown away as I thought I would be. It isn't bad though, not even the M7 is terrible. A good point of the Kubelik set is the M5 might be better in it then in the Bernstein (Sony), though Bernstein's M7 and M8 are far better than Kubelik's.  It seems that they just don't have good sound by today's standards, also Kubelik's slow movements, especially in M5 and M6 are to strict rhythmically, no length and breath as the works demand.

[barry guerrero]

.     .      .    slow movements, especially in M5 and M6 are to strict rhythmically, no length and breath as the works demand.

In the sixth symphony, the slow movement is a moderate andante (andante moderato), and not an adagio. In the score, the word "langsam" (slow) isn't used anywhere in that movement. This is in opposition to the Adagietto of M5, where "sehr langsam" (very slow) is written out in several spots. I would say that Kubelik is factually more correct. Mahler's own timings were closer to 14 minutes.

[Jot N. Tittle]

Mahler's own timings were closer to 14 minutes.

Ja, he may have marked it that way, but he didn't play it that way. He is reported to have done the Adagietto in just under nine minutes. When it is done in ten minutes or less, it doesn't seem rushed; but when it goes much over ten minutes, it seems (to me)  to d-r-a-g. Perhaps it is a matter of perception of what it's about: a love letter or a funeral piece. I'm on the love-letter side.

     . & '

[barry guerrero]

The 14 minutes that I'm refering to is for M6, not M5. Sorry.

[Wunderhorn]

I misspoke, it wasn't necessarily the speed I was referring to, but that it just doesn't seem fluid enough. Both movements I was describing require ambiance. I've heard the French Horn throughout the Kubelik symphonies and they just don't say ambiance.

[wagnerlover]

Just want to remind everyone that the "box set" isn't Kubelik's only statement re Mahler.  The new Audite releases have great sound and real "live performance" excitement. 

[Leo K]

And Kubelik's live 1951 performance of the M5, with the Concertgebouw orchestra, is outstanding (on the Tahra label).  One of the best M5's I've heard.