Bychkov M5 out October 14

[erikwilson7]

Here is the listing on Presto: https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/9368467--mahler-symphony-no-5

This came quicker than I thought!

[barryguerrero]

It's not a big issue, but I'm hoping they don't do some of the weird emendations to the cymbal part like they did under Neumann. As I recall, there were some extra crashes. Also, I think they sometimes used suspended cymbal when the part called for plate cymbals, and vice versa. It could have been an older edition of some sort.

Am I right in thinking Inbal rerecorded the 5th with the Czech Phil.?   .     .    .  I have their M7 with Inbal (which is great!).

[ctcdaggett]

Inbal/Czech Philharmonic/Jan 2011/Exton EXCL-00060, Mahler Symphony No. 5

[barryguerrero]

I found this Youtube video of Bychkov doing M5 with the WDR S.O. of Koln; the orchestra formerly known as the Cologne Radio S.O.  Bychkov correctly does NOT slow down where the trombones do their descending run near the end of the finale, but, instead, correctly slows down when you finally reach the brass chorale itself. Bravo!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGAnvTlyGIQ

Here are timings I found at HMV Japan: I. 13:11/ II. 15:30/ III. 17:52/ IV. 9:06/ V. 15:58 = 71:44

That's a tad long in the finale, so perhaps that includes applause (?).

[ChrisH]

Am I right in thinking Inbal rerecorded the 5th with the Czech Phil.?   .     .    .  I have their M7 with Inbal (which is great!).

The Inbal 5th with the Czech Phil is every bit as good as their M7. It's one of my favorites.

[erikwilson7]

It's not a big issue, but I'm hoping they don't do some of the weird emendations to the cymbal part like they did under Neumann. As I recall, there were some extra crashes. Also, I think they sometimes used suspended cymbal when the part called for plate cymbals, and vice versa. It could have been an older edition of some sort.

This was my big issue with that Neumann recording. You're spot on. The percussion is just so weird, and I've never heard anything like it in other recordings. Then again, this is the cycle with those weird voicings (parallel fifths?) during the "southern storm" moment in the M3.I, and the metal *ping* hammer sound in the M6. There's just a bunch of funky stuff going on in that cycle.

[barryguerrero]

Parallel 4ths, which gives it a sort of Chinese music sound. I think it had to be that somebody played their part as trumpet in Bb, when Mahler frequently writes for trumpet in F.

[erikwilson7]

I will say… I’ve listened to this twice now and it is excellent. I’ve heard better Fifths from radio broadcasts, YouTube videos, etc., but this may be the all-around finest studio recording I know of. Let’s see how I feel once the excitement wears off.

The horns sound amazing throughout.

[barryguerrero]

Is it on Spotify?    .    .    .  Anyway, the C.P.O. horn section has completely changed its tone production concept over the last two decades. Like most horns sections today, they use various different makes and models. However, it's my understanding - and my ear tells me that this true! - that they're frequently using the Engelbert Schmitt 'triple' horns: low F, Bb and high Eb. Phil Meyers in the N.Y. Phil. switched from a Conn 8D to a Schmit triple. Then other members of the N.Y. Phil. horn section began to follow suit. I really like the sound of them.

[erikwilson7]

Okay, the dust has settled, the hype is over.

This recording is a great choice as a score reference recording. It's pretty much flawless in that regard. It's still one of my top picks now, but it is just missing that edge that studio recordings like Markus Stenz's have, which will remain my favorite pick. Also, it won't excite you as much as a live recording. But this is very good for a studio recording!

The sonics are excellent, but the spot-miking is very obvious at times. The primary issue with that is the second movement, where the woodwinds have the fate motif against the trumpets, but the winds part is weirdly loud; it just sounds unnatural. Also, you can perfectly hear the harps glissing at the second movement climax, something you pretty much never get to hear. This is cool, but it's obviously doctored... sort of like the Paavo Järvi M2.

Still, I love it. It's one of my all-time favorites. Think of it as a middle ground between the Boulez and, perhaps, Bernstein. It has the detail of Boulez and it has more excitement, but not quite as much as someone like Bernstein gives us.

[barryguerrero]

I'll listen to it at Spotify. Actually, I did listen to the second movement and thought it was quite good. I'm pretty happy with both the old Kubelik and Karajan recordings, as well as the more recent J. van Zweden/London Phil. M5.

[erikwilson7]

I’ve said it so many times but that old Kubelík cycle is my guilty pleasure.

Actually, no guilt! It’s really just that good. It’s something that most Mahler folks can actually agree on.

[erikwilson7]

I agree – mostly – with this review: http://www.musicweb-international.com/Classrev/2022/Oct/Mahler-sy5-PTC5187021.htm

"As I mention in my introduction above, if there were not so many established classic recordings, this could be among the best, not least in terms of its sumptuous sound and virtuosic playing, but… "

"That loftiness, intensified by the banality of the opening fanfare, is perhaps mocking and ironic but the music must still be interesting and for me Bychkov’s plod is simply a good deal less interesting than Karajan’s or Shipway’s more plastic phrasing. Likewise, the panicky, agitated central section is rather dull under Bychkov’s hands, lacking the sense of a hysterical but futile resistance the best performances conjure."

It's just missing that "oomph" that the classic, exciting, great 5ths have, but as far as details and performance goes this is top notch among the best.

[barryguerrero]

Thank you for that.