Author Topic: D.H. gives 5/8 rating for Zinman/Tonhalle Orch./RCA M5th  (Read 42127 times)

Offline Psanquin

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 64
Re: D.H. gives 5/8 rating for Zinman/Tonhalle Orch./RCA M5th
« Reply #30 on: September 25, 2008, 07:20:01 AM »
Quote
That WAS the middle way. The short version is: "It sucks. Don't buy it!"  ;)


Olé!!! but...



 :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

Offline Dave H

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 212
Re: D.H. gives 5/8 rating for Zinman/Tonhalle Orch./RCA M5th
« Reply #31 on: September 25, 2008, 04:15:26 PM »
psanquin wrote:

"Thanks. I will prepare a file with them in order to compare with friends and of course here if anybody is interested"

Just out of curiosity, has anyone here ever heard of copyright? I'm all for comparing recordings, as long as it's legal. I do hope that this site isn't put at risk.

Dave H

Offline sperlsco

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 579
Re: D.H. gives 5/8 rating for Zinman/Tonhalle Orch./RCA M5th
« Reply #32 on: September 25, 2008, 06:05:07 PM »
4. Recordings that have a more "vehement" opening of the second movement--where to start? Karajan, Barenboim, Abbado (Chicago), Boulez, Mackerras...I could go on. What sounds so poor in Zinman's recording is the patently artificial balance between cellos and basses and the brass. I can see how some people might like the really, really close lower strings (they do sound vehement with a mike up their collective butts like that), but to me it's such a phoney sound that I don't buy it. No orchestra sounds like that in real life. The brass (and everyone else) are way, way behind them, and almost completely without impact. Normal ensemble perspective is backwards. Then there's Zinman's exaggerated staccato phrasing (which Mahler does NOT ask for), which doesn't let the sound growl as it should (compare Barenboim here)--the music has to sound wild. This is way too controlled, too tightly and fussily over-articulated.

Dave H

In my mind, the most vehement second movement is the Barshai/GMJO.  I listened to the second movement of the Zinman last night (without the "Night Mode" engaged), and there is a severe lack of intensity to my ears.  The tempi seems strangely stiff and inflexible, which is a change from Zinman's wonderful handling of tempi on Mahler's first four symphonies.  I'll have to re-listen to see if I can pick up on the staccato phrasing. 

It is always interesting that two people can come away with completely opposite impressions of the same performance.  That is one of the key reasons to compare one's own past reactions to others' on a wide range of recordings.  In terms of whether you'll share someone else's impression of the music, it is not so much that Poster A is right and Poster B is wrong.  It's more relevant (to you) whether they have similar tastes in music.  For example, I tend to lurk on the M-List, and find some fascinating discussions there.  However, there are some very intelligent and knowledgable posters (seemingly professors and teachers) that have polar-opposite tastes from me when it comes to Mahler recordings.  I would never state that Psanquin is "wrong" when he hears vehemence in Zinman's M5-2.  However, I would perhaps not base a purchasing decision on him if he (or anyone) consistently had different reactions to recordings than me. 
Scott

Offline barry guerrero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3928
Re: D.H. gives 5/8 rating for Zinman/Tonhalle Orch./RCA M5th
« Reply #33 on: September 25, 2008, 06:37:43 PM »
I just don't think that it should be a big surprise that Zinman might not be equally great in all 9 (or 10, or 11) Mahler symphonies. Who is? I really didn't feel that Zinman's "Resurrection" was all that interesting or unusual either, other than for the nicely recorded (natural sounding) bells at the end. Again, my guess is that he'll feel more involved with M6 through M8.

But again, I've yet to hear his 5th.

Barry

Offline Damfino

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 198
Re: D.H. gives 5/8 rating for Zinman/Tonhalle Orch./RCA M5th
« Reply #34 on: September 25, 2008, 08:08:59 PM »
Quote
However, I would perhaps not base a purchasing decision on him if he (or anyone) consistently had different reactions to recordings than me.

That's one of my rules as well. There are some user reviews at Amazon in which I consistently disagree with the reviewer, and use that disagreement sometimes as the basis for purchasing a recording that the reviewer has panned.

Offline Dave H

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 212
Re: D.H. gives 5/8 rating for Zinman/Tonhalle Orch./RCA M5th
« Reply #35 on: September 25, 2008, 10:12:25 PM »
Agreed! You can find a review with which you disagree just as useful as one with which you agree. The key is to find a critic who chooses his examples well (so you can see if you share the same points of emphasis or significance), and who then describes them accurately and consistently. You then have a basis to decide how useful the comments are--whether the critic likes the performance or not. I always tell my writers: "No one really cares about your opinion; just get the facts right and choose your examples well."

Two examples: I've read tons of reviews of the Mahler Second and Third by opera critics that only talk about the singers. I remember in particular a review of the Second that only talked about how wonderful the soprano was. Does anyone buy a Mahler 2 for the soprano (or alto, for that matter) as THE prime consideration? Perhaps some do, but I would never trust a critic with those priorities.

Next, there was an unbelievable Gramophone review (which you can find in their review archive) praising the Claudio Abbado's Berlin Dvorak's 8th for its "refusal to whip up excitement in the coda of the first movement" (or words to that effect). This, I thought to myself, is a COMPLEMENT? Here is a case where we find an accurate observation (it is a boring coda) but a conclusion drawn from it that tells me that this is a critic whose recommendations I would never trust--but I might love something he hates.

I remember also the reviews of Dmitri Mitropoulos's Vaughan Williams Fourth Symphony with the NY Phil on tour of the UK, quoted in Thomas Trotter's book "Priest of Music"--the critics sniffed that it was too loud and aggressive. I mean, the FOURTH?

You get the picture...

Dave H

Offline Psanquin

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 64
Re: D.H. gives 5/8 rating for Zinman/Tonhalle Orch./RCA M5th
« Reply #36 on: September 25, 2008, 10:53:47 PM »
Quote
In my mind, the most vehement second movement is the Barshai/GMJO.  I listened to the second movement of the Zinman last night (without the "Night Mode" engaged), and there is a severe lack of intensity to my ears.  The tempi seems strangely stiff and inflexible, which is a change from Zinman's wonderful handling of tempi on Mahler's first four symphonies.  I'll have to re-listen to see if I can pick up on the staccato phrasing. 

I would never state that Psanquin is "wrong" when he hears vehemence in Zinman's M5-2.

Please feel free to state that. Nobody is infallible; errare humanum est. But regarding the vehemence issue I must strees that I refer to the beginning of the movement. Hopefully we will be able to do the promised comparative listening that sure will clarify this topic.

Regarding the whole movement I understand and respect your opinion. Zinman paces and shapes the movement in a very particular way not for all tastes. It is miles away from the typical heart on sleeve approach which everybody like so much (myself included). But I also enjoy (and need) other Mahler Fifths, provided they are so extraordinarily played and recorded like this is. Zinman manages to maintain line and interest. Melodic lines are lovingly cherished but never saccharine. Another characteristic is the frequent use of dynamic shading, dipping from mf to p and back again. Quite a revelatory reading, please allow me, just for the initiated.

Quote
I just don't think that it should be a big surprise that Zinman might not be equally great in all 9 (or 10, or 11) Mahler symphonies. Who is?

Barry, I have the answer… at least according to Dave. Amazing as it seems there is one conductor who gets outstanding ratings (9 or 10) in ALL :o the symphonies in terms of Artistic Quality:

Symphony No.1
10
Symphony No.2
10
Symphony No.3
10
Symphony No.4
9
Symphony No.5
9
Symphony No.6
9
Symphony No.7
10
Symphony No.8
9
Symphony No.9
(9 or 10?) *
Symphony No.10
10

* The Ninth is addressed in the review of the box, as it was released separately subsequently. In that review it is assesed as even finer than No.5 

Well, Who’s that boy? The name is… Michael Gielen!!




« Last Edit: September 25, 2008, 11:05:26 PM by Psanquin »

Offline barry guerrero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3928
Re: D.H. gives 5/8 rating for Zinman/Tonhalle Orch./RCA M5th
« Reply #37 on: September 26, 2008, 05:27:29 AM »
Well first off, David certainly isn't alone in holding Gielen's Mahler in high esteem. Just read the personal testimonies at Amazon.com, for example. Second, many of his reviews were written before something else even greater (in my opinion) was made available. Gielen's "Resurrection" would be an example of that happening, I think. Since then, we've had the MTT/SFSO M2, which ain't bad (even though I'm not huge fan of the MTT cycle), as well the excellent (in my opinion) Ivan Fischer one. I think the dvd of Boulez's M2 is far better than his DG studio recording of it.

I've been very upfront about this: for a complete cycle that's conducted by just one person, the Gary Bertini one reins supreme for me. That doesn't mean that I can't respect Dave's high opinion of Gielen's Mahler. At the end of the day, no matter how you slice and dice it, Gielen is still a pretty darn good conductor. For me, Bertini steers a course that's straight between Berstein, Tennstedt, and Inbal on the one hand, and Boulez or Zinman on the other hand (actually, so far, I think of Zinman as the modern day equivalent of Kubelik. Then again, I haven't heard this disputed M5 from him).

Barry
« Last Edit: September 26, 2008, 06:59:13 AM by barry guerrero »

Offline Psanquin

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 64
Re: D.H. gives 5/8 rating for Zinman/Tonhalle Orch./RCA M5th
« Reply #38 on: September 26, 2008, 11:46:09 AM »
Quote
David certainly isn't alone in holding Gielen's Mahler in high esteem.

That Gielen is an estimable conductor goes without saying. I rank among his fans. His tenth is a first choice to me. But as you said yesterday it is almost an impossible task to find a Mahler cycle successful in all the symphonies –in fact I have not found it yet. For that reason I have always found David’s ratings on Gielen very surprising. The orchestra is not first rank, the sonic does not resist comparison with his competitors and Gielen's approach does not always work so well to reach this flying colours.

Quote
Since then, we've had the MTT/SFSO M2, which ain't bad (even though I'm not huge fan of the MTT cycle), as well the excellent (in my opinion) Ivan Fischer one. I think the dvd of Boulez's M2 is far better than his DG studio recording of it.


Amazing :D I just agree with everything. Extraordinary MTT2 in a cycle not always successful; exciting Fischer 2 (against the opinion of a dear mahlerian friend of mine), and as well agreement regarding both Boulez M2.

Quote
I've been very upfront about this: for a complete cycle that's conducted by just one person, the Gary Bertini one reins supreme for me.

End of the agreement  >:( Err, I also adore Gary Bertini. In twice unforgettable occasions I enjoyed his Mahler live (Seventh and Fifth) and I know well his cycle with the WDR and also the Tokyo Metropolitan recordings. As a whole I would not give these higher ratings in all the symphonies. In fact I find Gielen more consistent than Bertini.

Quote
I think of Zinman as the modern day equivalent of Kubelik

I would say they are worlds apart. I dare to say that Zinman' Mahler is absolutely different to any other conductor's Mahler.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2008, 11:54:29 AM by Psanquin »

Offline Dave H

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 212
Re: D.H. gives 5/8 rating for Zinman/Tonhalle Orch./RCA M5th
« Reply #39 on: September 26, 2008, 12:49:15 PM »
A few points re: Gielen--

Barry makes a sensible observation when he says that you need to look at reviews in context--that is, in terms of what was available at the time. Since those recordings have come out, and the Mahler explosion (glut?) has continued, there have been individual performances that may be better in certain respects, but Gielen's work certainly stands on a high enough plateau that I see no need to revise my view. As Barry also knows, I am a big fan of Bertini's.

Second, as usual when one is speaking in gross generalities, psanguin misses the nuances in my view of Gielen's cycle. For example, his Fourth is a good performance, but the recording got a "9" rating, as I make perfectly clear in the actual review, because of the sensational performance of the coupling--Schreker's Prelude to a Drama. To say that Gielen's orchestra is not "world class" or the sound isn't to psanguin's taste strikes me as begging the question. As a rule, I never worry much about sound ratings because this is even more impressionistic that opinions about performances. Everyone hears music on different equipment, in a different acoustic environment, and a recording that sounds fabulous in one room may sound dreadful on headphones, or on cheaper (or more expensive) systems. So why quibble about it? Beyond very general issues of balance and naturalness (such as I point out concerning the lopsides basses in Zinman's Mahler 5), the whole issue strikes me as nonsense. If anyone here has participated in an audiophile chatroom, you will know that they make our discussions of performance issues look like perfect examples of the scientific method!

As to the orchestra--again, a generic criticism of no real value. Gielen obtains world-class results IN MAHLER. You will not hear any significant lapses in ensemble, any embarrassing slips, or other mishaps such as mar cycles with orchestras that are theoretically "world class", such as Karajan's Berlin Philharmonic, Bernstein's New York Philharmonic, Solti's Chicago Symphony, Sinopoli's Philharmonia, etc. From a purely technical point of view, Gielen's work is more consistent than any of them (as is Bertini's). These German radio orchestras, as I never tire of pointing out, are often superb, and terribly under-rated. But beyond that, there's a question of idiomatic style, and this is where I think Gielen has few peers aside from Bernstein. He understands Mahler's sense of color, his desire to make rough or ugly sounds, and his willingness to give him what is actually written in the score, better than just about anyone else. One example: listen to the downward clarinet glissando/portamento at the beginning of the scherzo of the Seventh. It's just as written, but you won't hear it to the same degree in any other performance. This is what makes Gielen special.

Finally, my relationship to the Gielen cycle was a interesting. Originally, I was asked to contribute notes to the cycle (for free, by the way, because I wanted to review the recordings so I couldn't take money). I did, and those notes formed the basis of my book on the Mahler symphonies. Gielen HATED the notes so much he decided to write the rest of them himself, with typically incoherent and demented results. He objected to the fact that I "only" talked about the actual music, but neglected the wider philosophical and aesthetic context. So I didn't feel at all bad reviewing the discs and praising them knowing that he detested my work in the first place. Perhaps he hated the reviews too, because they were too kind!

Dave H

Offline sperlsco

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 579
Re: D.H. gives 5/8 rating for Zinman/Tonhalle Orch./RCA M5th
« Reply #40 on: September 26, 2008, 05:46:52 PM »
Finally, my relationship to the Gielen cycle was a interesting. Originally, I was asked to contribute notes to the cycle (for free, by the way, because I wanted to review the recordings so I couldn't take money). I did, and those notes formed the basis of my book on the Mahler symphonies. Gielen HATED the notes so much he decided to write the rest of them himself, with typically incoherent and demented results. He objected to the fact that I "only" talked about the actual music, but neglected the wider philosophical and aesthetic context. So I didn't feel at all bad reviewing the discs and praising them knowing that he detested my work in the first place. Perhaps he hated the reviews too, because they were too kind!

Dave H

Now that story is hysterical!  The main reason that I keep both the boxed set and the individual commercial releases is because I love your booklet notes in some of the symphonies (IIRC M2 and M7 come to mind).  Rarely do I find other booklet notes as useful (the first Kaplan M2 is also one of the best in terms of booklet notes; oh yeah and the Waart cycle too).  The pairings of modern music have yet to do anything for me and are certainly not part of the reason that I keep the individual recordings.   Conversely, the pairings in some of Chailly's individual releases is what makes me keep both those and the boxed set. 
Scott

Offline barry guerrero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3928
Re: D.H. gives 5/8 rating for Zinman/Tonhalle Orch./RCA M5th
« Reply #41 on: September 26, 2008, 06:17:28 PM »
"End of the agreement  Angry Err, I also adore Gary Bertini. In twice unforgettable occasions I enjoyed his Mahler live (Seventh and Fifth) and I know well his cycle with the WDR and also the Tokyo Metropolitan recordings. As a whole I would not give these higher ratings in all the symphonies. In fact I find Gielen more consistent than Bertini."

Fair enough. I would still prefer to pick and choose different performances from different sources. I just happen to find the Bertini Toshiba/EMI recordings to be remarkably consistent. I think that his 2nd and 5th fall just a tad flat, but I truly like the double set of bells that Bertini employs at the end of the "Resurrection": one set of bells - on stage - playing the part as written, and another set of bells playing ad lib. behind them (they sound either offstage or dubbed-in, to me). I love his 8th; it's still my favorite of anybody's.

As for Zinman sounding nothing like Kubelik, fair enough again! My point was more that both conductors come across, to me, as sounding "very musical" - putting musical priorities above those of theatrics or point-making. Zinman just happens to be a conductor who I admire across a very wide range of repertoire, and I feel the same way about Kubelik.

Offline barry guerrero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3928
Re: D.H. gives 5/8 rating for Zinman/Tonhalle Orch./RCA M5th
« Reply #42 on: September 26, 2008, 06:33:02 PM »
David wrote:

"He (Gielen) understands Mahler's sense of color, his desire to make rough or ugly sounds, and his willingness to give him what is actually written in the score, better than just about anyone else. One example: listen to the downward clarinet glissando/portamento at the beginning of the scherzo of the Seventh. It's just as written, but you won't hear it to the same degree in any other performance".

Folks, while I'm not always THAT crazy about Gielen's Mahler - mostly because of tempo relationships, I suppose - this is THE aspect of Gielen's Mahler that I do admire; a willingness to sound rough and tumble when the music asks for such a treatment. I believe that this treatment is fully inline not only with what Mahler put down on the page, but with his somewhat cantankerous personality as well. And, if you admire Gielen's willingness to sound this way, then it follows that you're not always going to be thrilled with Abbado's - and other folks! (let's not pin it all on Abbado) - attempts to constantly purify, beautify, and make more "chamber-like", Mahler's special brand of polyphony and counterpoint. I do often times like Abbado for tempo relationships though.

I hope I've expressed my thoughts somewhat clearly. Probably not.

Offline Psanquin

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 64
Re: D.H. gives 5/8 rating for Zinman/Tonhalle Orch./RCA M5th
« Reply #43 on: September 26, 2008, 11:52:15 PM »
Quote
Everyone hears music on different equipment, in a different acoustic environment, and a recording that sounds fabulous in one room may sound dreadful on headphones, or on cheaper (or more expensive) systems.


I would not consider myself a high fidelity fanatic but the flat sound and poor dynamic range of most of the Gielens are audible in any medium level equipment. It makes their listening a bit irritating.

Quote
As to the orchestra--again, a generic criticism of no real value. Gielen obtains world-class results IN MAHLER. You will not hear any significant lapses in ensemble, any embarrassing slips, or other mishaps such as mar cycles with orchestras that are theoretically "world class", such as Karajan's Berlin Philharmonic, Bernstein's New York Philharmonic, Solti's Chicago Symphony, Sinopoli's Philharmonia, etc.


To my ears in Gielen the orchestral contribution sounds more dutiful than inspired. To be not so generic: the Langsam of Mahler’s Third is a palpable example of the orchestra weakness. Ending of the Andante amoroso in the Seventh; compare it to Maazel / Wiener Philharmoniker.

But most importantly all of the conductors you cite are much more demanding for their musicians than the anticlimactic readings of Gielen.

Quote
Finally, my relationship to the Gielen cycle was a interesting. … Perhaps he hated the reviews too, because they were too kind!

 :o Nice account; sure he was happy with the ratings. Hopefully in February I will attend to his Knaben Wunderhorn near of my town. I’ll take with me his box and Dave’s book and will ask him –innocently- about it.

I criticize Gielen but I find his approach thought-provoking. I rate very high his 1st, 7th and 10th, and individual movements as the vertiginous Scherzo of the Fifth, his restrained Second movement of this same symphony (quite close to Zinman’s!) the first movement of the Third with his ironic final march, etc.

Quote
I love his 8th; it's still my favorite of anybody's.


I know this well Barry as you have told about that many times. I am afraid I don't share your entusiasm. In the 8th –btw my most beloved Symphony- Bertini came as a disappointment, mainly due to the solists: listen to the tenor barking in the Höchste Herrscherin. Isn’t it? In addition Bertini resorts to some rather crude adjustments of tempo. Also disappointing the caotic Gloria and the languid orchestral introduction of the second part.

I find the Adagio of the Ninth the greatest realization of bertini both in his EMI and Fontek recordings.

Quote
As for Zinman sounding nothing like Kubelik, fair enough again! My point was more that both conductors come across, to me, as sounding "very musical" - putting musical priorities above those of theatrics or point-making. Zinman just happens to be a conductor who I admire across a very wide range of repertoire, and I feel the same way about Kubelik.


Now I see what you mean and I agree absolutely.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2008, 11:54:11 PM by Psanquin »

Offline barry guerrero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3928
Re: D.H. gives 5/8 rating for Zinman/Tonhalle Orch./RCA M5th
« Reply #44 on: September 27, 2008, 12:36:48 AM »
"I know this well Barry as you have told about that many times. I am afraid I don't share your entusiasm. In the 8th –btw my most beloved Symphony- Bertini came as a disappointment, mainly due to the solists: listen to the tenor barking in the Höchste Herrscherin. Isn’t it? In addition Bertini resorts to some rather crude adjustments of tempo. Also disappointing the caotic Gloria and the languid orchestral introduction of the second part."

Everybody is excessively languid with the opening of Part II. I do wish they would ALL speed it up a bit. In fact, I seriously would like to see a cut made somewhere it there. Yes, the tenor isn't the best by any means; but certainly no worse than any number of other ones in M8. Richard Leech was fabulous on the Maazel/VPO M8 (too slow overall, though; not enough organ either). Ben Heppner was better on his first recording of it for Colin Davis, than the one he did with Chailly. Johann Botha is pretty good on the Boulez. But for me, those are just, "smelling the flowers along the way" issues. For me, the crux of the entire piece is the very ending, and I've never heard a better one than the Bertini. I love how he plows right through the 3 Penitant Women section - often times dragged out waaaay slowly - and then takes the ending of the symphony at an unbelievably slow speed. I love it. Sorry, I just do. It makes no sense to me to schlag your way through 80 minutes of a huge symphony, only to rush the very best part: the ending. Too many conductors do just that.

If Boulez had had more organ in his recording, along with bigger tam-tam smashes at the end, I would have liked his all the more.
« Last Edit: September 27, 2008, 12:50:44 AM by barry guerrero »

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk