Vänskä M1

[erikwilson7]

Osmo Vänskä and the Minnesota Orchestra have the next installment in their Mahler cycle being released on 2 August, 2019.
https://www.amazon.com/Mahler-Symphony-Major-Minnesota-Orchestra/dp/B07T14ZJL9

A brief sample of the second movement can be heard here: https://www.hbdirect.com/album/4108710-mahler-symphony-no-1-osmo-vaumlnskauml-minnesota-orchestra.html#tab_works_details

The second movement can also be purchased for download on iTunes and each movement can be sampled for 90 seconds.

Timings
I. 16:06
II. 7:25
III. 11:23
IV. 20:57

56:45

A few observations: the offstage trumpets sound great at the beginning of the first movement. It sounds like Vänskä is following Mahler's instruction to have the trumpets be distanced in different places, one a bit closer and the rest further away. Pretty cool.
This is very divisive: The basses all play in unison at the start of the third movement, just like in Alsop's recording. It seems this is becoming the norm these days, and I can't decide where I stand on this. The tuba solo sounds excellently lugubrious and present.
The beginning of the finale sounds very controlled in Vänskä's hands, just like most of his other Mahler recordings. Take that as you will; it could be good or bad, but I find that both Stürmisch movements (in M1 and M5) work better when the conductor isn't afraid to just let go of the reins a bit. Either way it seems that Vänskä's approach is to never let one orchestral detail slip through the cracks, and you have to admire that about his releases so far.

All in all, I'm really looking forward to this.

[barryguerrero]

In the inner two movements, I like the scherzo to be slower (yet rhythmically emphatic) and the slow movement to be quicker. I think the 'Frere Jacques in minor' opening should be played quicker than usual (but still soft).

[erikwilson7]

Barry, what are some of the best examples of what you described?

[barryguerrero]

Bernstein/Concertgebouw. Also Jurowski/L.P.O. and Neemi Jarvi/SNSO (Chandos), but those two have "Blumine" in the second movement position. My favorite is the recent Adam Fischer/Dusseldorf one - its inner movement timings are 7:43 and 10:04. He also gets the finale in at just less than 20 minutes.

Two more 'obscure' examples are Wakasugi/Dresden Staatskapelle and Kletzki/Vienna Phil. (but that one has a cut in the finale).

[John Kim]

The audio sample of II. sounds very good. I always look for 'Grand in scale, minute in details' approach in Mahler. That's why I like Vanska's Mahler.

[John Kim]

After the 1st, Vanska's next Mahler release might be 4th or 10th (Complete). The will come 3rd.

[erikwilson7]

John, I'm also the same way about what I like in Mahler recordings. It's why I like the Chailly cycle so much. And this current Vänskä one, even if his conducting is unusual in parts.

And I believe you're right, with the 7th coming sometime sooner or later as well.

Erik

[Konsgaard]

I don't understand Vanska in Mahler. I think when the set is completed it will be one of the weirdest Mahler sets ever. I've just finished listening to the 1st... Is this Mahler?

[Konsgaard]

The only Vanska Mahler I've liked so far (but it is far from perfect) is the 2nd. Yes, I gave it 5/5 stars because it was note-perfect, it had a fabulous 2nd movement (one of the best) but the choral singing let me down. I think if I were a newbie and listened to his Mahler 5 or 6th for the first time, I'd be completely put-off and would have stayed away from this composer. Where is the frenetic energy needed? The passion? Instead of that we have super-clinical instrumental playing and too much tempering with the dynamics.

[erikwilson7]

Konsgaard,

I generally agree with what you're saying, but I think it's important to keep in mind a few things when approaching something weird like Vänskä's Mahler set. With so many good sets out there already today, the only real value in recording and releasing Mahler's music is if the conductor and/or orchestra has something new or different to offer. I think Ádám Fischer's current set is case in point: an unknown orchestra when it comes to Mahler's music, with a conductor no one would have thought to conduct Mahler excellently? What a unique concept! Who would've thought Düsseldorf could tackle Mahler?

Anyway, I digress. My point there is that Vänskä does have something to offer. It may not be the way we're used to hearing the music, but at least it's somewhat of a fresh approach. The sound quality is, I think, pretty much unprecedented too. As for the frenetic energy? The passion? Now I think the issue with that is that those concepts are somewhat subjective. Is frenetic energy dictated by tempo or instrumental timbre? Is passion related to tempo? Or vibrato? Or dynamics? All of the above? The reason I ask this is because I for one find just as much passion in Vänskä's Adagietto as I do in HvK's, or even Gielen's. Just my opinion though, and everyone sees it differently. I know many on here would disagree.

I think what we need to appreciate about Vänskä's Mahler set here is what it is intending to offer us: note-perfect performances and incredible sound quality. For passion we already have Bernstein, Chailly, I. Fischer, Levine, Tennstedt, heck even some Boulez.

What we have here is different Mahler, but isn't that what we need?

Erik

[Konsgaard]

I have a completely different approach. For me a new recording should not necessarily have something new to offer. I collect Beethoven sets obsessively. Yes, I get excited with a new approach but not when it sounds anaemic or lifeless (ie. Adam Fischer's Beethoven set on Naxos). Back to Mahler: I prefer to listen to a well-played, no-nonsense performance even when it has nothing new to say provided that it is committed and expresses emotion, instead of listening to micromanagement and manipulations just for the sake of sounding different. Yes, I've heard some things afresh with Vanska. But what's the point? Do I get enjoyment out of it, as when I listen to Bertini, Bernstein or Chailly? I don't. His points were interesting, I heard some parts differently, but that's about it. For me music (and art in general) is more than making a point. It needs to have a spiritual aim and quite frankly, I don't get this in Vanska. When I listen to to his recordings I don't feel transformed in any way.

Again, let me say that I like a different approach when it has an overall, cohesive purpose (rather than making a pedantic point). I like Zinman's Mahler for the clarity. I like Currentzis's vision of a life-affirming transformation (instead of death) in the finale of the 6th (what a 6th!) Even Nagano's 8th with its sensual textures seems to work (though not my favourite).

PS. Regarding Vanska's Adagietto from the 5th, I am sorry to say this is one of the most vulgar, uninvolving renditions I've heard. Not saying I like schmaltz, on the contrary I like it fast and clear, but this just doesn't sound right to my ears. The first and second movement are OK, albeit devoid of feeling. But his Adagietto is something that ruins the whole performance for me.

[erikwilson7]

I think it's valuable that many of us have these different approaches to what we appreciate about a performance. Not even just of Mahler's music, but in general. It goes to show how many different angles music and art can be approached from, and that it means something different to everyone. Vänskä's Mahler is by no means my favorite; I prefer the likes of Chailly, Stenz, Bertini, Bernstein, Blomstedt, among others. However, what I do appreciate about Vänskä's Mahler is akin to walking around in an exhibit of sketches that were traced flawlessly: "well, you certainly drew it as correctly as possible. Looks just like it should! Good job, Mr. Vänskä." Vänskä's M6 is a "perfect tracing," whereas Bernstein's DG M6 is an entire painting: slightly flawed but fully human. But again, it just depends on what you're in the mood for.

And I definitely agree with you when you say that Vänskä does not offer a transformative experience; I would turn to at least 10 other conductors before him for that kind of listening.

I like what you said about different approaches with an overall cohesive purpose. It's funny, given our generally different approaches to listening to recordings I couldn't agree more with the examples you gave.

Also PS. I want to clarify that Vänskä's Adagietto is not entirely my cup of tea either; I was just saying that I do personally find passion in it. My type of approach to that movement is more along the lines of Chailly, Abbado/Lucerne, Shipway (even though it's slow), Gielen, the Fischers, and Harding. I figured I ought to say this before I get ripped to shreds on this board.

[barryguerrero]

I love the Vanska M2 and the inner two movements of M6. I like much of what I heard in M5.

[Prospero]

As for "Currentzis's vision of a life-affirming transformation" in M6 suggested by Kornsgaard, what do you make of the report of Mahler in tears after conducting the 6th?

[John Kim]

I admit that there is a touch of aloofness in Vanska's M1st.